Connect with us

Politics

Gallup Poll: GOP Now Viewed as Better Party for Security, Prosperity

Published

on

GOP

A new Gallup poll conducted September 1-17 finds “Americans by significant margins now view the Republican Party as better than the Democratic Party” at protecting our country and its significant interests.

The “Bottom Line” is “Americans now generally see the Republican Party as better than the Democratic Party at handling two key government objectives—protecting citizens from international threats and promoting a strong economy.”

The poll shows Republicans are better “at protecting the nation from international threats by 54% to 39%, respectively.” Gallup explains the 15-percentage-point GOP advantage on security matters is its largest since 2015 when it had a 16-percentage-point advantage.

As for ensuring the nation remains prosperous, the GOP received 50% to 41% confidence, with the nine-point lead being the GOP’s largest since 2014. The polling is significant as “last year, the GOP had a narrow advantage on international matters while the parties were essentially tied on economic matters. More of this change has come from declines in Americans perceiving the Democratic Party as better on these issues than from increases for the Republican Party.”

39% of Americans say the Democratic Party will do a better job in the next few years of protecting us from terrorism and other international threats. However, that number is down from 46% last year. The Republican Party received a small increase in this area from 50% to 54%.

As for prosperity, the Democratic Party has received a seven-point drop from 48% to 41%. Now 50% say the Republican Party is better at keeping the U.S. prosperous up from 47% in 2020.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Media

National Public Radio Discontinues Reading the Declaration of Inependence

Published

on

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

A post by Todd Starnes alerts that National Public Radio (NPR) has ditched its annual ritual of reading the Declaration of Independence. NPR, derisively referred to by Starnes as “National Public Welfare Radio,” announced the cessation of reading the Declaration. Which staffers at the taxpayer-funded radio network had been reading aloud the document since 1988.

The void that would have resulted from not reading the Declaration was not unfilled. “Instead, NPR broadcast an 11-minute conversation about whether or not the Founding Fathers actually meant the words “all men are created equal.” Here’s a link if you’d like to listen to their “screed” (which also reminds us frequently that many of the Founding Fathers owned slaves).

Starnes disclosed that he owns “KWAM, the leading news talk radio station in Memphis, Tennessee. It angers me that my tax dollars are used to prop up a broadcast competitor that spits on our Founding Fathers and our Founding Documents.”

Interestingly, NPR’s newly voiced contempt and cynicism for the Declaration of Independence does not encompass refusing taxpayer-funded government support. Whether or not the Founding Fathers meant what they said and what they wrote may be grist for energetic banter on a radio program that is increasingly committed to shrill progressive virtue signaling. However, the topic of this discussion among smug well-remunerated media activists is irrelevant. The words of the Founding Fathers have been inspirational for two hundred and forty-six years and have been the moral and legal foundation used to free the slaves and develop Constitutional principles to ensure that slavery can never be implemented in this country. Slavery currently exists in several countries now, but NPR is dedicated to ignoring that scourge.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Every Word Of This Is False’: Ted Cruz Factchecks Ilhan Omar’s Attack On Coach Kennedy Prayer Case

Published

on

Rep. Ilhan Omar

On Monday night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) factchecked Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) after she made multiple false claims about the Supreme Court ruling in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Court ruled 6-3 that a public high school football coach in Washington state had his First Amendment rights violated when he was punished by his school district for praying on the field after games where students could see.

As previously reported, “In 2008, high school football coach Joseph Kennedy began a tradition of praying at midfield after each game. Over time, his players and even members of the opposing team began to join him. In September 2015, a school administrator addressed the matter with Kennedy after an opposing team complained and the coach briefly stopped his prayers.”

“On October 14, 2015, Kennedy told the school district that he was planning on resuming his prayer tradition at the next game. The school district told the coach that his prayers violated the district’s policy, but Kennedy continued to pray at the next two games. The school district subsequently placed him on administrative leave, banned him from participating in the football program, and refused to renew his contract for the following season. Kennedy took the issue to federal district court, arguing that the school district had violated his First Amendment rights,” the report added.

In response to the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Kennedy, Omar tweeted, “The Supreme Court just ruled that public school teachers can pressure students to join in prayer at public school events but can also retaliate against those that don’t join in. Religious freedom is dead in America.”

“Every word of this is false,” Cruz responded.

Omar’s claim that the Supreme Court’s decision allowed to teachers to “pressure students to join prayer” is false. The Court’s ruling just protected Coach Kennedy’s religious freedom to pray publicly.

Omar was also incorrect in claiming that there would be retaliation against students who did not join Kennedy in prayer – the coach’s tradition of praying after games began with him praying alone at midfield after football games. Kennedy’s school district even noted that Kennedy had “not actively encouraged, or required, participation.”

Additionally, in contrast to Omar’s claim that “religious freedom is dead in America,” the Supreme Court ruling actually strengthened protections of religious freedom.

Writing for the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch explained, “Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head.”

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch added. “And the only meaningful justification the government offered for its reprisal rested on a mistaken view that it had a duty to ferret out and suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims.”

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List