She was an intelligent and hard-working woman who used her God-given talent to undermine the Constitution, weaken the republic, allow for the murder of babies and generally spread evil in the land. If we believe that her last words were, in fact, her last words, she used her final moments on earth to engage in partisan politics. The best I can say for her is that I hope she repented before she found out firsthand what God thinks about partial-birth abortion.
Resetting the Relationship Based on Reciprocity by The Honorable Terry Branstad, U.S. Ambassador to China
We have long said we want a constructive, results-oriented relationship with China, and that view has not changed. A constructive relationship means that we are honest and candid not only about our shared interests, but also about the issues that divide us. We need not just endless reaffirmations of our respective interests, but concrete outcomes that truly benefit our peoples.
From a U.S. perspective, we have made too little progress. For years, the Chinese leadership has urged us to focus on areas of cooperation while setting aside our differences, and for years, the United States had agreed to that approach in the expectation that, over time, we would address our concerns as well. But the Chinese leadership has exploited this approach. Often it has insisted we sweep differences under the table as a prerequisite for engagement. Sometimes it made promises to address our concerns yet failed to follow up. As a result, our relationship has delivered fewer and fewer of the results that matter to the American people.
At the same time, the relationship became increasingly imbalanced. An example is unequal access for U.S. companies, journalists, diplomats, and even civil society. As an open society, the United States has welcomed Chinese companies into our markets to sell products to American consumers, to invest and bid on projects, and to raise capital. We have welcomed Chinese students and researchers into our universities and laboratories, where they have acquired knowledge to modernize and develop China’s economy. While U.S. journalists face restrictions on reporting and even entering China, Chinese state media workers have long enjoyed open access in the United States. PRC diplomats have open access to American society, while our diplomats in China are required to navigate a state approval system for even the most basic engagements with the Chinese people.
The Chinese government, while benefiting from our openness, has exploited it – in a way that is increasingly inconsistent with international norms. Some Chinese entities have purchased American companies not to create jobs, but to acquire technology that is then taken back to China and developed to compete against us. Some Chinese companies have raised money on our stock exchanges yet refused to subject themselves to the standard auditing rules required by all other listed companies, U.S. or foreign. A small number of Chinese students and researchers use access to our universities, research facilities and companies to steal American intellectual property. These actions have not only harmed our bilateral relations but also tarnished the remarkable legitimate economic progress that the Chinese people are rightfully proud of.
President Trump came to office vowing to make the overall relationship more balanced and reciprocal. The phase one trade deal and recent U.S. policy actions are an important step in our quest to create a genuine level playing field for American stakeholders. Many claim this is an effort to thwart China’s legitimate development aspirations, to “contain” China’s rise, or to “decouple” from China.
This is categorically false. The root cause of the current tensions in the relationship is China’s longstanding strategy of only selectively “coupling” with the United States and systematically controlling the access of Americans to Chinese society. At our universities, we continue to welcome the vast majority of Chinese students, but we have taken action to deny visas to those who illegally acquire U.S. intellectual property and research results, or who gain knowledge in order to compete unfairly with us in the cutting edge technologies of the 21st century. We have also taken action against Chinese companies, including well known ones like Huawei, that have stolen U.S. intellectual property, circumvented U.S. export controls, or posed a threat to the security of our citizens’ private data and our communication networks.
We are two different nations with different pasts. The United States continues to learn from its mistakes and push forward to forge a better future. We hope that China can do the same. In this endeavor, we will need to build a foundation for understanding and true reciprocity. It must start with the Chinese government being willing to address our concerns about the imbalance in the relationship and allowing our two peoples to build relationships through unrestricted engagement and uncensored discussion. Only then will I enjoy the freedoms to engage the Chinese people that we guarantee Ambassador Cui in the United States, and only then will we have genuine reciprocity and a genuinely balanced relationship.
The freeing of the slaves is something everyone should celebrate. Right now the big corporations like Nike are trying to own what should be an American holiday. Patriots, both black and white, should take ownership and really show the world how powerful we are when we all come together to support what is right.
Rebrand their "glorious revolution" into something more closely resembling reality.
It's terrifying to see how many people are upset that the government doesn't have the ability to imprison us in our homes. Dark times ahead, friends, when half the country is begging for totalitarianism.
Save the small businesses -- Match me!
From the VCDL email:
Several thousand gun owners turned out at the temporary General Assembly Building on Monday, January 13! The hearing room was divided into two areas - the larger area for gun-rights supporters and the other was a smaller area for gun-control supporters.
Gun owners filled up their side of the room quickly, while the gun controllers side was still pretty empty. To make it looked like they had more people and not look so pitiful, a search for gun-controllers in the waiting line outside the meeting room doors was conducted. Countless gun owners in the line were skipped over in the search for more gun-controllers. Whenever a gun controller was found, they were allowed to go into the meeting room, but no more gun owners were allowed in.
Sheriff Scott Jenkins of Culpeper County and Sheriff Richard Vaughn of Grayson County were in the room in support of gun owners. Sheriff Jenkins spoke twice during the hearings.
The meeting was chaired by Democrat Senator John Edwards. The Republicans on the committee pointed out multiple mistakes and even rules that were broken in the running of the committee, but the Democrat-controlled committee ignored the complaints and lurched forward anyhow, rules be damned.
Republican Senator Bill Stanley, who could not be at the hearing due to a trial he had to attend, had been promised by John Edwards that no gun bills would be heard on Monday, but Senator Edwards went back on his word and gun bills were heard anyhow. Senator Mark Obenshain brought up that broken promise, but to no avail.
Each side was only given 5 minutes total to speak on each bill.
The first gun-control bill to pass out of committee was SB 69, a one-handgun a month bill, which reinstated the last version of that law before it was repealed. Senator Saslaw's version of that same bill, SB 22, was rolled into SB 69 and SB 69 was passed out by a partisan vote of 9 to 5. Republican senators Mark Obenshain and Ryan McDougle put up strong resistance, as did speakers who pointed out that the law had been a failure, but to no avail.
Next up was SB 70, a Universal Background Check bill. Saslaw's version of the same bill, SB 12, was rolled into SB 70. A substitute bill was then offered for SB 70, which made the background checks only apply to sales of guns and not transfers, which fixes the problems with letting a friend or family member use one of your guns without you being constantly present. However, it still strips an 18, 19, or 20 year old from being able to own a handgun, since a dealer cannot process a handgun purchased by federal law for someone that age. Also, a background check would have to be run on all sales, even sales to immediate family members, friends, etc.! SB 70 passed by a partisan vote of 9 to 5.
Senator Barker's Red Flag Law bill, SB 240, was eviscerated, as all the flaws and dangers of that bill were brought up by Republicans Obenshain, McDougle, and Chafin on the committee, as well as by the pro-gun speakers. None of the concerns were addressed and the bill was passed by a partisan vote of 9 to 5.
Finally, SB 615, SB 450, and SB 505, all of which allow localities to pass various gun-control ordinances, were rolled into a substitute version of SB 35, making SB 35 an omnibus bill that destroys preemption by allowing Virginia localities to create a confusing set of local gun-control laws. Again, speaker after speaker spoke against SB 35, but it passed by a partisan 9 to 5 vote.
The gun-control bills that passed out of committee will now head to the Senate Floor to be voted on in a few days. VCDL will have an acton item shortly to bombard Senators with calls and emails encouraging them to opposed the four bills.
Elections have consequences and we are in a real fight to protect our rights. Twitter Facebook To join VCDL, click here. To contribute to VCDL, click here.
Join VCDL at: https://vcdl.org/join
VCDL's calendar: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
Our mailing address is: Virginia Citizens Defense League PO Box 513 Newington, VA 22122-0513
Thanks to the Trump economy, I've got a nice chunk of change to spend on presents this year, and I want the theme to be MMIAGA: make made in America great again. Also I need some new jeans that aren't cucked Levi's. Any suggestions?