Schools Ban Textbooks That Don’t Promote LGBT

1963 Communist Goal #26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

The New American: From FreedomProject Media:

Government K-8 schools in California recently became the first in America to start demanding pro-homosexual and transgender propaganda in history textbooks, sparking celebrations among those who would indoctrinate children. In fact, history textbooks that refuse to push the party line on the so-called LGBT agenda will be banned from government schools in the state.

The decision to ban books that do not dishonestly celebrate homosexuality and alleged homosexuals, taken this month, was made pursuant to the 2011 “Fair Education Act.” The scheme mandates that history and social studies curricula promote the “accomplishments” of LGBT types, even if claims that a historical person was a homosexual are disputed or outright bogus.

“This long fought victory is the next step for California students to learn about the contributions and history of LGBTQ people,” Rick Zbur, executive director of the pro-LGBT group “Equality California,” was quoted as saying. “Equality California applauds the State Board of Education for this historic decision.”

Textbook publishers that refused to identify individuals whom LGBT activists claim were homosexuals were banned. Among them was Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. The company agreed to some of the LGBT movement’s demands, and even claimed, falsely, that homosexuals are “central to both United States history and culture.”

But the globalist publisher refused to identify poet Langston Hughes as a homosexual, saying there was not enough evidence. And apparently, for the militant LGBT movement, that means children may not read those books at school.

To read the rest of the article click here

Democrat Anita Earls to Nullify Rural Voters Choices in Elections

Earls suggests radical change to how we elect Congress, implies too many whites being elected

Democrat candidate for North Carolina Supreme Court Anita Earls would destroy the ability of rural North Carolinians to select their own members of Congress because she doesn’t like the choices our voters are making. In a racially charged proposal, she suggests that voters are selecting too many white individuals for congress, but that candidates of color can’t compete for votes.

Earls recently wrote an article, published by a national magazine, aggressively advocating for the Fair Representation Act, which would permanently alter citizen’s ability to vote for a specific member of congress, require that candidate to have the most votes, or even for members of the public to know who their member of Congress is. This bill would divide North Carolina into three mega-districts and would swap election losers for winners. Some North Carolina voters would get to cast more votes than others, and some would appear to have more congressional representation than others in a scheme she says nationally would elect an additional 30 minority candidates to the U.S. House by not requiring winners receive a majority of the vote, and in fact be considered winners with only 17% of the vote or less. Earls says “it has the power to be transformative,” while supporters even say, “The zero-sum, winner-take-all system in which only one person is elected to represent each district no longer works.” In another piece by Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) he talks about how “parties representing as little as 1% of the electorate can gain representation…

“‘ As a former member of Congress, I was on the winning and losing side of campaigns, and of course the winner should have the most votes. Anita Earls’ race based election scheme would turn democracy on its head, destroy the ability for rural North Carolina to control who represents it in Congress, and simply nullify our democratic system as we know it. NCGOP Chairman Robin Hayes

As seen in the map (suggested by Earls) voters in rural areas would have their votes overrun by voters from major metropolitan areas, and coastal communities would be have their elected representative chosen by people in land-locked cities. More specifically, the citizens of Charlotte would elect the Congressional Representative for those on the Outer Banks, some 389 miles away. This could effectively eliminate the ability of rural citizens to select an elected officials that represents them.

In her battle over voting district lines, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Earls’ attempts to nullify 3 million voter’s choices for legislature cast in 2016. Voters will also nullify Earls’ plan to send losers of Congressional Elections to Congress and the ability to pick election winners to represent them,” continued Hayes.

In her plan, the “winners” in Congressional Districts only need 17% of the vote. “With ranked-choice voting, winning requires a lower share of the vote,” said Earls while detailing her radical proposal through a recent article in The Nation. The article includes heavy racist overtones, implying that too many white individuals are elected to Congress, while also suggesting that minority candidates can’t compete in traditional elections.

Earls says her scheme would add 30 minority members of Congress, by having them only need 17% of the vote. “Single-winner districts do not inherently empower people of color. It’s all about making their votes count by putting them in a majority position to elect. Ranked-choice voting in multi-winner districts lowers that threshold, down to 17 percent in a five-winner district—and greatly expands who has the power to elect.” (Anita Earls, “Could This Put an End to Gerrymandering?” The Nation, 6/26/2017)…she suggests that voters are selecting too many white individuals for congress, but that candidates of color can’t compete for votes. “Earls praises the plan by saying ‘potential minority seats jumps significantly as well, from 71 now to 101.’ and ‘…to guarantee minority representation, African Americans and Latinos will experience greater voting power.'” (Anita Earls, “Could This Put an End to Gerrymandering?” The Nation, 6/26/2017)

National Day for the Victims of Communism

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release

National Day for the Victims of Communism

Today, the National Day for the Victims of Communism, marks 100 years since the Bolshevik Revolution took place in Russia. The Bolshevik Revolution gave rise to the Soviet Union and its dark decades of oppressive communism, a political philosophy incompatible with liberty, prosperity, and the dignity of human life.

Over the past century, communist totalitarian regimes around the world have killed more than 100 million people and subjected countless more to exploitation, violence, and untold devastation. These movements, under the false pretense of liberation, systematically robbed innocent people of their God-given rights of free worship, freedom of association, and countless other rights we hold sacrosanct. Citizens yearning for freedom were subjugated by the state through the use of coercion, violence, and fear.

Today, we remember those who have died and all who continue to suffer under communism. In their memory and in honor of the indomitable spirit of those who have fought courageously to spread freedom and opportunity around the world, our Nation reaffirms its steadfast resolve to shine the light of liberty for all who yearn for a brighter, freer future.

To learn more about the Victims of Communism CLICK HERE

A wee bit of history if, we may. Lusty Beggars, Dissolute Women, Sorners, Gypsies, and Vagabonds for Virginia. – Colonial Virginia was always intended to be a piece of England translated to the Chesapeake Bay. King James I expected his three kingdoms—Scotland and Ireland being the other two—to develop their own American colonies. By 1640, however, the surviving overseas plantations were all English, and neither Scots nor Irish were especially welcome. Nevertheless, many a Scot still made his way to Virginia, though not always under circumstances that commended the journey.

Scotland’s dealings with the Old Dominion began in 1628. They generally were thought to have gone moribund until about 1668, after Charles II had assumed the three thrones. Indeed, the idea has been that Scots reached Virginia with regularity only after the Act of Union of 1707 created the United Kingdom of Great Britain. That overlooks a migration of Scots that began in the 1650s.

Click here to read more of this very interesting article.

IEA: United States to Dominate World Energy Market Within Eight Years

The New American – According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the growth of energy production in the United States, doubling as it has in just the last eight years, is expected to double again in the next eight. Authors of the IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook report released on Tuesday could hardly contain their surprise: “A remarkable ability to unlock new resources cost-effectively pushes combined United States oil and gas output to a level 50% higher than any other country ever managed; already a net exporter of [natural] gas, the U.S. becomes a net exporter of oil in the late 2020s. In our projections … the rise in US tight oil output [fracking] from 2010 to 2025 would match the highest maintained period of oil output growth by a single country in the history of oil markets.”

The U.S. production increase makes up an astonishing 80 percent of the increase in oil production expected from all oil-producing countries combined. This, according to IEA, will have the beneficial effect of keeping oil prices “lower for longer … within a $50-70/barrel range [all the way out to] 2040.”

Click here to read more.

Rep. Meadows’ Statement on Passage of House Tax Reform Bill, H.R. 1

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) released the following statement on the passage of H.R. 1, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act:

“Today, the House kept its promise to pass a historic tax reform proposal—and it’s a delivery that is long overdue. Moms, dads, small business owners, and working families across the country sent us to Congress to create a simpler and fairer tax code that grows our economy, works for American families rather than D.C. special interests, and returns power from bureaucrats in Washington back to the people of Main Street. Today is an monumental step toward fulfilling those promises.

 But make no mistake: we must not allow ourselves to view today’s vote as a job completed. This is not a time for extended celebration or victory laps. This task will not be finished unless both chambers, the House and the Senate, come together and send a tax reform proposal to President Trump’s desk. It’s on ALL of us to make that happen. The American people have had it with political statements or symbolic victories—they want results, and the results won’t be delivered until President Trump signs the bill into law. Congress must run through the tape and finish what we promised. No more excuses.”

NC Representative Larry G. Pittman Update

November 16, 2017

It has been several weeks since I have given you an update.  Interesting things have happened so far during the interim, especially in our special sessions.

On October 5, the House passed HB 717 Judicial Redistricting & Investment Act with a vote of 69-43.  This bill addresses the need for correcting imbalances and lack of resources that have resulted from population increases and a general lack of attention to the efficiency of judicial districts across the State for about sixty years.  Rep. Justin Burr of Stanly County worked diligently on this bill, traveling all across the State to meet with judges and District Attorneys to learn their concerns and needs for a more efficient judicial system in the State.  His work should be appreciated.  Of local concern to my constituents, I worked with Rep. Burr to add one Superior Court Judge, one District Court Judge and two new Assistant District Attorneys to the Cabarrus district through this bill.  I really appreciate Rep. Burr’s willingness to hear from our judges and District Attorney Roxanne Vaneekhoven, as well as from us Legislators in the district, and to address our concerns as he has done.  I was glad and proud to support this bill.  Now, we are waiting for the Senate to act on it in the next special session, which will convene on January 10.

Under Republican leadership, we have been working for the last several years to reduce bureaucratic red tape on businesses in our State through regulatory reform.  SB 16 Business Regulatory Reform Act of 2017 was another step in that process.  It had passed the House 94-19, and Gov. Cooper had vetoed it.  The Senate and House both overrode the veto.  The vote in the House on Oct. 5 was 70-42.  I was one of the 70.

There has been an ongoing effort to free local governments from having to put certain public notices in newspapers and simply publish them through electronic media.  There is no consensus on this; so it has been difficult to do.  So a local bill for Guilford County, SB 181 Electronic Notice – Guildford County, was offered this year.  The House passed this bill by a close vote of 58-87 on October 5.  I voted for it.  It is now law in that county.  We’ll see how that goes and possibly move the effort forward elsewhere in the State later.

The Electoral Freedom Act of 2017, HB 656, was one with which I had some problems because I felt it lowered standards too much.  I did not vote for the bill originally.  The conference report made it even worse, in my estimation, by reducing the percentage required to avoid a primary runoff from 40% to 30%.  I vehemently disagree with this provision.  So I voted no on the conference report on Oct. 5. However, we were told that we will have an opportunity to correct this in the January special session, and a lot of my constituents wanted the original bill to be passed.  So on October 17, I voted to override the governor’s veto, and it was overridden in the House by a vote of 72-40.

In addition to these matters, I am serving as an Advisory Member on the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Education and the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Emergency Management.  There are some very serious matters for both of these committees to consider.  I’ll try to tell you more about that later, but there may be some things I cannot discuss.

The matter of Legislative Redistricting within the State is still a bit uncertain.  We are waiting on the courts to finish their rulings on the maps adopted by the Legislature.  I voted against these maps because they are unconstitutional.  Our State Constitution calls for us to redraw the maps after each census.  This year is four years early.  There are other objections being raised by the Democrats.  I particularly object to the changes made in Cabarrus and Rowan Counties because the lawsuit against the existing districts did not mention those.  Therefore, there was no justification for changing them.  It remains to be seen where all of this will end.  For now the court has ordered that a master map maker from California should redraw our maps.  I have heard that he has completed that redrawing, but I have not yet seen the result.  I’ll let you know more about this as the matter progresses.

For now, I wish you the Lord’s great blessings and a very Happy Thanksgiving.

God bless,

Rep. Larry G. Pittman, North Carolina General Assembly, House of Representatives, 1010 Legislative Building,

16 W. Jones Street, Raleigh, NC  27601-1096, 919-715-2009,

Supreme Court to Consider California Law Forcing Pro-lifers to Promote Abortion

The New American – The Supreme Court announced Monday that it has agreed to hear a case challenging a California law requiring crisis-pregnancy centers, under the threat of heavy fines for noncompliance, to tell their clients how to obtain state-subsidized abortions.

The case, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, charges that the Golden State’s Reproductive FACT Act violates the First Amendment’s guarantees of freedom of speech and religion by forcing pregnancy centers to disseminate information that violates their religious beliefs.

The law passed the California legislature in 2015 on a party-line vote — Democrats yea, Republicans nay — and was signed by Governor Jerry Brown, also a Democrat. As The New American reported at the time, the act mandates that pregnancy centers offering medical services either post or distribute to their clients the following notice:

California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services (including all FDA-approved methods of contraception), prenatal care, and abortion for eligible women. To determine whether you qualify, contact the county social services office at [insert the telephone number].

Click here to read more.