Back during the primaries, Kamala Harris didn't win a single vote, but a lot of people upset with "Genocide Joe Biden" wrote in "Uncommitted," hoping to send a message that he'd better change policy on…

Of all the “swing states”, Michigan is probably the tightest. And it’s 15 electoral votes also make it one of the most valuable. Which is why a Michigan judge’s ruling against Democrats trying…

Keep telling yourselves: "it's just the Zionists!" No, it's THE JEWS.

Some people just don't get how DEMONIC these Israeli's are. These are WAR CRIMES! And what does the world do? Nothing. This empowers them to do this even more!!

A classic moment. The post George Harrison was my God: Steve Lukather on the “first solo that killed me” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Churchill and the Necessity of Victory Winston Churchill was an advocate of diplomacy. As leader of the opposition, he spoke in Parliament in December of 1950, offering strong but qualified support of Prime Minister Clement Attlee’s foreign policy: Appeasement in itself may be good or bad according to the circumstances. Appeasement from weakness and fear is alike futile and fatal. Appeasement from strength is magnanimous and noble and might be the surest and perhaps the only path to world peace. The context for this assertion was the strength of Britain’s firm alliance with America and its nuclear arsenal. That nuclear threat Churchill saw as necessary for gaining Stalin’s ear. In this context, backed by immense strength, Churchill would later say, “Meeting jaw to jaw is better than war.” Churchill is more famous for realizing when appeasement was impossible, when it would only accelerate the momentum towards war. But both statements reflected a larger truth that he recognized. His deeper message was one of the need for discernment: neither appeasement nor confrontation are always right. One must not shrink from meeting the actual challenge, rather than clouding one’s view of the world with ideological screens, and respond poorly to the threat we actually face.  More clearly than anyone on the political scene, Churchill grasped the nature of Hitler’s threat. He understood Hitler’s fanaticism, narcissism, and psychopathology: he was never interested in compromising anything, convinced of his own unparalleled genius.  As with most psychopaths, Hitler knew how to use the morality of his opponents to his decided advantage. Most totalitarian revolutionaries follow the strategy of the bloody Danton: De l’audace, encore de l’audace, toujours de l’audace — ever increasing audacity is the way to master the forces of civilization who will be crippled by their own inhibitions.  Faced with such an opponent, Churchill understood the futility of saving civilization by aiming for anything less than victory. With Stalin, he would not rule out even first use of nuclear weapons, which fortunately never came to pass after the end of World War II. He rejected the idea that that we must never use the atomic bomb until, or unless, it has been used against us first. In other words, you must never fire until you have been shot dead. [That] seems to me undoubtedly a silly thing to say and a still more imprudent position to adopt. Facing a psychopath in charge of a terrifying and dominating military, Churchill saw that no compromises could be sought, even to adopt a goal in war that was not completely committed to victory. In the spring of 1940, with Britain’s Norway campaign careening toward complete defeat, with Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Denmark already controlled by the Nazis, and only a week before the German blitzkrieg would burst upon Holland, Belgium, and France, Churchill wrote to Lord Halifax, his Cabinet colleague and an architect of the appeasement policy: We have never done anything but follow the line of least resistance. That leads only to perdition. Considering the discomfort & sacrifice imposed upon the nation, public men charged with the conduct of the war sh’d live in a continual stress of soul. Faithful discharge of duty is no excuse for Ministers: we have to contrive & compel victory. It was this idea that drove the most effective generals. George Patton was good at one thing only — winning military campaigns. His short post-war gig in charge of DP camps for Holocaust survivors brought him shame. Making and winning war was his genius. His repositioning of his Third Army in record time when the Nazis threatened to break through to the sea in the Battle of the Bulge was a spectacular achievement. Prior to that, he was the chief architect of the disastrous German losses and Falaise, a battle which might have been even more decisive had other generals who had not fail to close the ring and allow many German troops to escape complete encirclement and to fight another day. Patton instilled his ethos of victory in his men. War, he was saying, is not primarily about noble ideas and gallantry — it is about defeating the enemy. In his standard talk that he would give to his troops when he would visit them, he would famously say:  No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Nazis Exist Today Fanatical psychopaths dedicated to the annihilation of those they hate are still here. The mullahs of Teheran and their proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Gaza all adhere to Nazi-like beliefs about Israel and its people. They equally are dedicated to the defeat of the United States, which they realize with the patience imbued by a 1,400-year-old culture, will take a little while.  And the evidence of what this mindset does when cut loose is alike in its aims with the Nazis, and even more chilling in that, while the Nazis tried to conceal their worst atrocities, these monsters have publicly celebrated their orgy of sadistic torture, rape, abduction, and massacre. Naifs and preening intellectuals think that they see in this not a reincarnation of Nazi hate wearing clerical robes but rather fellow travelers in the struggle against colonialism. This view is catered to by today’s Democratic Party, which has slowly but surely achieved Obama’s stated goal of putting daylight between America and Israel — which has led, as it must, to the toleration and then the accommodation of antisemitism in its many shifting guises. With its best public face, this acceptable, progressive antisemitism constantly looks past the unmistakable, unavoidable truth that the Iran-coordinated campaign of extermination is not something capable of a negotiated solution. Every negotiation for them is only an attempt to gain a concession while yielding nothing; it is only a preparation for the next demand, in a never-ending chain until the dreamed-of annihilation is achieved. There was no acknowledgment of that in Chicago. They have no time for what they cannot manipulate and control. All can be bought or tricked away, nothing is transcendent except ambition. There is no ideal that cannot be stripped, ravished, then set out to work the street for its master. And so, for the sake of votes in Michigan, for the sake of an entire caucus that has risen to inordinate power in a party that has learned to reject the superordinate, they will pretend. Perhaps they can bring some to believe that their half-hearted defense of Israel that does not contemplate victory leads inevitably to the next atrocity and the next. Perhaps they can lead some to believe that gradual betrayal is really nothing more than loving paternalism. Most Americans are past that. Let us be resolute in seeking victory. Our foes don’t believe we can do that. And neither do those who ruled the party in Chicago. It’s up to us to show them we can. READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin: The Virtues of Immigrant Assimilation The Gollum Possibility at the DNC The post Churchill Knew the War Must Be Won appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The incoming archbishop of the notorious archdiocese of Boston is slamming a “Catholic” college for hosting a Harris-Walz fundraiser, while his Chicagoan counterpart is taking the opposite approach to America’s Abortion Party. However, both Judas and Peter recognized that they had done wrong. I wonder if Cupich has. Ahead of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) this month, Salve Regina University in Rhode Island hosted a fundraiser for Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign, featuring the Democratic nominee’s running mate, Minnesota governor Tim Walz (D). The fundraiser brought in an estimated $600,000 and was attended by over 300 Rhode Island Democrats. Walz himself spoke at the event, reportedly touting abortion. “Who’s asking to take away women’s reproductive rights?” Walz asked, in a speech reportedly centered on attacking former President Donald Trump and his Republican running mate, Catholic convert and Ohio senator J.D. Vance. Walz is said to have quipped, “Things really work best in communities when you mind your own damn business.” Bishop Richard Henning of the Diocese of Providence, soon to be the archbishop of Boston, had his office issue a statement saying that he and the diocese “were surprised and disappointed by the decision of Salve Regina University to rent space to a partisan political event and fundraiser, and we’ve received a number of messages from Catholics across Rhode Island expressing the same surprise and disappointment.” “The Church’s role in political matters is firstly to form the consciences of the lay faithful,” Henning’s statement insisted, continuing to note that the diocese “does not permit Catholic institutions in Rhode Island to endorse candidates for office nor even give the appearance of such endorsements.” I’ve written extensively for The American Spectator on just how antithetical to Catholic moral and social teaching the policies of both Harris and Walz are. Topping the list of decidedly-un-Catholic positions the Democratic duo share is the issue of abortion. It seems that for the past twenty years, conservatives have suggested that whoever is the Democratic nominee is the most pro-abortion candidate in American history. This is generally true, as the Democratic Party has rapidly become the party of abortion adoration. At this point, women are praised as heroes just for slaughtering their unborn offspring, regardless of circumstance (although Democrats love to find the most sordid stories possible to try to play the heartstrings of those uninitiated into the abortion cult), and any who dare suggest that butchering babies in the womb mightn’t be the glorious kindness Democrats think it is are smeared as extremists and reviled as everything from oppressors and misogynists to Hitlerian dictators. Harris and Walz are now leading the pro-abortion charge. The Democrats’ abortion cultism was on full display during last week’s DNC, with speakers ranging from state-level legislators and high school girls to the head of the abortion giant Planned Parenthood and a veritable pantheon of the most radically pro-abortion presidents to still walk this earth. One thing not on display was the pectoral cross — or, indeed, the Catholic faith — of Chicago’s archbishop, Cardinal Blase Cupich, who offered the opening “prayer” at the DNC. Without ever mentioning the name of Christ Jesus, it seems that Cupich elected to walk in the footsteps of two of Christ’s disciples: Judas Iscariot and St. Peter. The Chicago cardinal made no mention of the atrocity of abortion, which the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has repeatedly reiterated is the paramount issue of our time and which even progressive-leaning Pope Francis has consistently condemned and likened to hiring a hitman. More importantly, the Catholic Church has definitively and irrevocably condemned abortion as among the gravest of moral evils, imposing upon those who participate in the sin the most stringent of penalties in the Church’s arsenal: excommunication. That penalty serves a more-than-punitive purpose; excommunication is meant also as a warning against particularly grave sins and as a remedy for the harm caused by such sins, urging the sinner to repent of his crime and return to communion with the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ. With a crowd of certainly the most pro-abortion people in the whole country, and arguably in the whole world, Cupich had a rare and blessed opportunity to call those present — many of whom, such as President Joe Biden and governors Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) and Phil Murphy (D-N.J.), identify as Catholic — to repent, a chance to speak out against this sin which has claimed the lives of tens of millions of innocent American children. Not a word did Cupich say against this horrific evil, this veritable genocide, even though an abortion bus was parked right outside, operated by Planned Parenthood. At least Judas was paid thirty pieces of silver for his betrayal of innocent life. I don’t know which would be more damning: if Cupich did it for free or if he billed the DNC. While the Judas comparison may strike some as harsh (I assure you, it isn’t nearly harsh enough), Cupich did also imitate the chief of the Apostles — unfortunately, he chose the lowest point of St. Peter’s story to pay homage to. Just as the first Pope denied even knowing Christ, so Cupich hid the cross around his neck, neatly tucking it into his inside jacket pocket, and refused to utter the name of Jesus. However, both Judas and Peter recognized that they had done wrong. I wonder if Cupich has. The Iscariot, famously, despaired of the forgiveness of God, even as Christ was suffering torture and death for the sake of His betrayer’s sins, and hanged himself in shame over his sin. Peter also recognized that he had sinned, denying that he even knew the God-made-man whom, just hours before, he had pledged to follow even unto death. But where Judas despaired of God’s mercy, Peter did not. “Tears wash away the sin which the voice is ashamed to confess. Tears do not ask for pardon, they merit it,” wrote St. Ambrose. “I know why Peter kept silence. It was because an earlier request for pardon would have added to his offence. We must weep first, and then pray.” Let us hope and pray that Chicago’s cardinal — and, indeed, all those who call themselves Catholic but insist on supporting the demoniac policies and child-slaughter of the Democratic Party — will follow more nearly in St. Peter’s footsteps, instead of in Judas’s. Yet to do either necessitates a sense of sin. With the naked barbarism on display in Chicago last week, it seems that many (if not all) of those clamoring for more and more unborn children to die are oblivious to the evil they are hailing. Again, an opportunity Cupich squandered, likely costing thousands of souls, and possibly hundreds of thousands of lives. READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: A Painful Division in the Heart of the Church The Atrocity Known as ‘Catholics for Kamala’ The post Disgracefully, a Catholic Cardinal Fronts for Abortion appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Chicago — Kamala Harris on Thursday shared with America what she often heard from her late mother as the now-vice president was growing up: “Never do anything half-assed.” This bugs me. The left has this way of expanding the definition of words until they no longer mean anything. Sadly, that advice did not manifest itself at the Democratic National Convention. Voters who are undecided didn’t get a rousing speech that would explain how Harris would make America better and stronger. She rattled off a list of ideas, but she didn’t sell those policies. I saw a squandered opportunity. When candidates run for office, they are supposed to sell their policies. That way, if they are elected, they can claim a voter mandate for change. But the real argument Harris offered America was expressed by Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer when she warned Americans about “that man from Mar-a-Lago.” How would the world see a Harris victory? Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta offered, “When she takes her oath of office, as she will this January, our allies will cheer, our enemies will fear, and we will have a Commander in Chief that we can trust.” Harris mocked Donald Trump’s weird obsessions with Kim Jong Un and Vladimir Putin, which are admittedly cringe-worthy. But she ignores the real foreign policy nightmare with real-world consequences. President Joe Biden’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, which Harris did not mention, was a show of American weakness that was followed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and then Hamas’ brutal Oct. 7 attack on Israel that left 1,200 dead and did not spare children. It was nice to hear Harris pledge to “always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself” because Israelis “must never again face the horror that a terrorist organization called Hamas caused on Oct. 7” — but her push for a ceasefire undermined that claim. Wednesday night’s theme was “A Fight for Our Freedoms,” but speakers offered muddled definitions of what freedom is. Barack Obama proclaimed, “We believe that true freedom gives each of us the right to make decisions about our own life, how we worship, what our family looks like, how many kids we have, who we marry.” OK. But then he added, “And we believe that freedom requires us to recognize that other people have the freedom to make choices that are different than ours.” Huh? “Freedom is not drowning in medical debt. Freedom is earning the same salary as a man does for doing the same job…. Freedom is about making our own decisions about our own bodies,” AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler said at a DNC meeting, according to ABC News. This bugs me. The left has this way of expanding the definition of words until they no longer mean anything. Harris said that Trump and his allies would “enact a nationwide abortion ban.” By what authority? Trump told Fox News that his biggest reaction was, “Why didn’t she do the things she’s complaining about? All of the things that she talked about — we’re going to do this, we’re going to do that, we’re going to do everything — but she didn’t do any of it.” In short, the moment that Kamala Harris had to convince voters was a bust. She didn’t tell the American people how she would make America better. Her argument was that she is a better person than Trump. Kamala also offered another piece of advice her mother gave her. “Never let anyone tell you who you are. You show them who you are.” And she did. Contact Review-Journal Washington columnist Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@reviewjournal.com. Follow @debrajsaunders on X. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM READ MORE from Debra J. Saunders: Kamala Harris Is No Joe Biden. Or Is She? In Chicago, Democrats Veer Left The post Kamala Harris Misses Her Chance appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. was clear yesterday at his first press conference after withdrawing from the presidential race. Three major issues compelled him to leave the Democratic Party and endorse Donald Trump for president: “Free speech, the war in Ukraine, and the war on our children.” Trump, he explained, has “adopted these issues as his own to the point where he has asked to enlist me in his administration.” Eight years is a long time to endure damage to America and Americans at the hands of hyper-progressive nonsense. The party two of his grandfathers helped build has become “the party of war, censorship, corruption, big pharma, big tech, big money,” Kennedy said. History will judge the Ukraine war as an Obama and Biden liability. It was initiated by a US-engineered coup in 2014, perpetuated by deliberately forestalling peace talks two years ago and costing the lives of 600,000 soldiers, needlessly. “Ukraine” is a victim of this war, and it’s a victim of the West,” he said. Now that the much-anticipated event has occurred, one question that needs to be asked is: Will RFK Jr.’s exit and endorsement actually benefit the former president and how much? Surveys are clear that most of Trump’s third-party defectors have been picking Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on test ballots where there are more choices. Polls show that a Kennedy withdrawal would benefit Trump. And even if it turns out that the numbers are not substantial (and no one knows for certain) small margins have ended up deciding recent presidential elections. One truth that is clear from the national NBC News poll is that Republicans have a stronger preference for Kennedy than Democrats. In July, Kennedy held net-positive ratings from Republicans (+11), while he was negative among independents (-18) and Democrats (-38). Republican voters clearly view RFK Jr. more positively. Moreover, Kennedy attracts almost all of Trump’s third-party defectors. July’s national NBC News poll also shows how the ballot changes from one with just the two major nominees to an expanded ballot that includes Kennedy. When third-party candidates are included in polls, Trump’s lead is 3 points, 40 percent to 37 percent, with Kennedy getting 10 percent, Jill Stein (Green Party) 3 percent, Chase Olive (Libertarian) 2 percent, and Cornel West 1 percent. In that six-way ballot, Trump kept 87 percent of the voters who backed him in a head-to-head contest, while 10 percent of his voters went to Kennedy, 1 percent went to Stein and 1 percent went to West. Over the past 72 hours, things have changed in the landscape of national politics. Kamala Harris’s odds of winning the 2024 presidential election have seen a reversal among leading bookmakers. Perhaps the most important disclosure came August 10th when Polymarket, often described as the “world’s biggest prediction market,” forecast that Harris would receive 52 percent of the presidential election vote against the former president’s 45 percent. As of 5 a.m. ET on August 21, Trump had regained the lead, with 52 percent of support versus Harris’s 47 percent. A crucial ingredient in the electoral mix mentioned above is the Independent vote. The latter play a major role in these numbers. Their numbers have continued to rise, tying a high of 43 percent last year, according to a Gallup telephone survey. (Democrats and Republicans by contrast each reflect only a 27 percent constituency.) With such numbers involved, the undecided figure can amount to enough votes to make a difference in a close race as in 2020 and what appears to be shaping up in 2024. From the results above, it still looks like two factors are in play. Harris’s star has started to diminish the more Americans learn who she actually is and what that would mean for them personally and America generally, and with RFK Jr. on board, Trump’s chances are enhanced measurably. But the real issue is twofold: Can Trump use RFK Jr. effectively, and will Trump tone down the hyperbole and rhetoric so as to appeal to not only RFK Jr.’s supporters (whose interests are not necessarily those of Trump’s), but that significant contingent of as yet undecided independent voters? If Trump’s numbers continue to edge upwards or stabilize with RFK Jr.’s support the election in November is, perhaps at this point, Trump’s to lose — as it seemed for a time after the assassination attempt and before Biden withdrew from the race. I say it this way because a nationally televised debate and subsequent election is approaching. And Trump and his team (including RFK Jr.) need a demeanor in speech and public persona that is inviting to RFK Jr. ‘s supporters and those undecided independents. (The ones Oprah Winfrey is in overdrive attempting to “hard sell” into Harris’s camp.) We all (and this includes Donald Trump) need to understand that, despite what Trump has said, Harris is not dumb. She has already demonstrated an impressive ability to use (or allow) the media to create a national image for her. The U.S. media has shown that it cannot be neutral in this election, or in any matter concerning Donald Trump (and his supporters). It continues to fawn over Kamala Harris while the latter steadfastly refuses to sit for interviews or stand for press conferences. Time magazine is a case in point. Its latest issue features a dramatic portrait of Kamala Harris on the cover bearing the engaging caption “Her Moment.” The magazine offered minimal substance on Harris’s performance as vice president. But it gushed a fountain of ink alluding to the virtual “carnival” atmosphere which accompanies Harris’s political events. And in an almost laughable fashion the interviewer attempted to place Harris’s public performance on the same level with last year’s “blockbuster summer for women of Barbie, Beyoncé, and Swift.” The left’s hypocrisy knows no limits. Time also invited political support from Senator Cory Booker, who invoked Star Wars characters to argue for Harris. “She has gone,” he said, “from being a Padawan to a Jedi master.” Apparently “the force” was not with her when it came to helping working class Americans (especially women she is supposed to care so much about) survive some of the worst inflation the U.S. has experienced in decades. It should be noted that Time also interviewed Trump for a cover story in April, but it didn’t look like Kamala’s. The former president’s was an 83-minute read, while the ridiculous post interview fact checking took at least 20 minutes to get through. Trump was virtually interrogated about his prosecutions, the January 6 ‘insurrection,’ his “dictator for a day” joke. The inquisition was ended with questions about the possibility of right-wing violence if Trump loses the election. Clearly, the intent of the interview was to provoke the former president. Americans are going to only hear and see what they are shown through the lens of the media. Trump needs to present a countervailing force and image of stability and confidence (not arrogance). In other words, he must remain calm and responsive, not agitated and reactive. With those optics, Trump will prevail. Many people want to vote for Trump because of the practical, American common sense he espouses (whether they admit it publicly in polls or not). The American public (which includes Republican and Independent voters) demonstrated that in 2016 and 2020. Let us hope Trump and his advisors (including RFK Jr. and his team) are savvy enough to understand this. Eight years is a long time to endure damage to America and Americans at the hands of hyper-progressive nonsense from two people who should never be allowed anywhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. READ MORE from F. Andrew Wolf Jr.: Is Donald J. Trump Channeling Pat Buchanan? Is ‘Man the Measure’? From Where Does Our Freedom Come? The post Kennedy Endorses Trump, Media Endorses Kamala appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Is abortion the only issue that affects women’s lives? In my view, the Democrat Party is brazenly erasing womankind across the board. They support gender not sex-based rights, which seems to mean the end of sports for girls and women and the weird requests to identify one’s gender “assigned at birth” and how one identifies now on medical forms and school applications. Iran, China, and Russia are waging a war against the West. This is real, not a paranoid fantasy. It also means the balkanization of identities into black, Hispanic, tribal, Native Indian, ethnic, LGBTQ+, etc. The Democrats sponsored caucuses divided up in precisely this way. Harris and Walz support trans “rights for children” above and beyond parental authority, and a trans rights movement that is essentially powered by Big Pharma, Big Surgery, Big Mental Health, and by a very angry Men’s Rights movement. (READ MORE from Phyllis Chesler: Silence of the Feminist Lambs: Not a Word on Hamas Horrors) The Democrats also support legalized surrogacy, despite the potentially negative consequences to the birthmother and to the child created for the purpose of being adopted away from their birthmother. These are all economic growth industries for everyone involved. To me, and to my generation of pioneering radical feminists, this erasure of biological women is regressive, not progressive. Islamism and Women However, and just as important, the Democrat Party and their presidential and vice-presidential candidates also lend their support to fascism and Islamist terrorism, which they consider to be a form of “resistance,” or “freedom fighting.” The Democrat National Convention featured a panel on Palestinian rights subtitled: “We Need to Restore the Soul of the Democratic Party.” Speakers were prominent Islamists and anti-Zionist Jew haters including James Zogby, the founder of the Arab American Institute, Keith Ellison, Minnesota Attorney General, and Hala Hijazi, a “Democratic organizer and fundraiser who’s had over 100 family members killed in Gaza.” Palestine and Human Rights? But not a panel devoted to Sudan, where real genocide and mass starvation is underway. There was no special panel about human rights in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, North Korea, China, or in any of the Arab Muslim states. This tells me that the Democrats are perfectly willing to continue sacrificing the women and dissidents of Iran and Afghanistan — as well as all those civilians in the West whom Iran has targeted for destruction — beginning with it’s plan to wipe Israel off the planet, half of whose population are women, and “people of color.” This party also supports Iran’s and its proxies’ killing American soldiers and Hamas’s kidnapping of Americans as hostages; Obama-Biden’s funding of Iran’s nuclear program, and Iran’s funding of Hamas’s terrorist underground tunnels which run the entire length of the Gaza strip. Lots of women and children, Hamas’s human shields, live or once lived there. This is also the party that has restrained Israel in terms of fighting back in what is an existential battle for its’ survival. Harris backs the embargoing of arms to Israel and has “emphasized Palestinian suffering due to Israel’s punishing military operations.” Iran, China, and Russia are waging a war against the West. This is real, not a paranoid fantasy. And the Democrats seem willing to continue appeasing these countries. Women and Crime Women live in every city, every state, including women of color. The Democrat Party’s position, across the country, is no bail, de-fund the police, catch and release criminals and migrants of color no matter how grievous a crime they have committed. Borders? They do not believe in any. However, women are also the victims of such policies, with Mexican cartels now utilizing rape as a form of currency for female migrants trying to cross the border. (READ MORE: Immigration of Cultures Hostile to the West Must End) Even those who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome or who feel deeply about women’s reproductive freedom and about anti-sexism in general, should begin to factor in these concerns as well. The post The Stakes for Women in This Election Are Enormous appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.