April 2017
Founding
Restoring the Spirit of 1776
Founding Fathers Republican Women will
John Adams, in
meet at 7 p.m. on Monday, May 15,
in the Parish Hall of Saint Stephen’s
Episcopal Church.
There will be a short business
meeting followed by our featured speaker
Saira Blair from Martinsburg, WV
Saira is a student at West Virginia University
and a Republican member of the WV House of
Delegates. When first elected, she was the
youngest state legislator in the nation.
The Founding Fathers Republican Women normally meet every
3rd Monday evening at 7PM in the Parish Hall of Saint Stephens
Episcopal Church, 115 North East Street in Culpeper.
2017 Board of Directors:
President: Barbara Kile
1st Vice President: Janet Mc Donnell/
Tish Smyth
2nd Vice President– Susan Bates
Treasurer– Nancy Rice
Recording Secretary– Pam Hoag
Corresponding Secretary– Linda Halevy
Table of Contents
P. 2 May 15 Program with Saira Blair
P. 3 Looking Ahead
P. 4 Summary of March FFRW Meeting (NAACP)
P. 5 President’s Corner: The Quiet Trump Supporters
P. 6 Chairman’s Corner: Federalist Papers
P. 7 Obamacare Repeal & Replace—Action Item
P. 8 Opioid Addiction—A Concern for Culpeper
P. 9 Republican Candidates for State Offices
P. 10-12 Summary of Obama-Era Surveillance
P. 13 Trump’s Accomplishments
P. 14 McAuliffe Vetos— An Unprecedented Number
P. 15-16 Soapbox—Eugenics Roots of Planned Parenthood
P. 17 Cartoons
Saira Blair
The May 15 Program —Republican Millennials
Our “Millennials” May meeting will feature Saira Blair, a Republican member of the West Virginia House of
Delegates since 2014 when she was elected as the youngest state lawmaker in the country. At age 17,
Blair defeated the two-term incumbent in the Republican primary. In the November general election, when
she was 18, she won 63% of votes in her district against 30% for her 44-year-old Democratic opponent.
When she ran for re-election to a second term in 2016, she was unopposed in the Republican primary and
defeated her Democratic opponent by a margin of 68.2% to 31.8%.
She is not your typical millennial; she identifies herself as very conservative, pro-marriage, and pro-family.
She opposes abortion, supports voter ID laws, favors term limits, believes welfare recipients should be
drug tested, and seeks to make West Virginia a right-to-work state.
Blair said she had received “multiple death threats” during her first year as a legislator—perhaps because
of her age, her sex, or her views. In January 2016, she was named the chair of the Legislature’s Eastern
Panhandle Caucus. During the 2016 campaign, Blair said that, if re-elected, she hoped to be appointed to
the House Education Committee. She described herself as a big proponent of career and technical education (CTE) because it is a better fit for many young people than a four-year college degree. She describes
her sponsorship of the House’s “pain-capable” abortion act, which prevents abortions after 20 weeks, as
her proudest moment in the legislature.
Saira Blair is a student at West Virginia University where she is studying economics and Spanish. To attend the Legislature’s 60-day spring session, she deferred her spring semesters and made up her classes
in the summer and fall. Despite her success in politics, she does not plan to be a career politician.
Saira should have an interesting story to tell about her experiences as a young, female legislator and as a
committed conservative at a large college campus. Please plan to attend our meeting on May 15 at 7 p.m.
at St. Stephens Episcopal Church, and invite any high school or college students you know who would like
to learn more about political involvement.
2
Looking Ahead
April 28-30, 2017, VFRW Convention in Roanoke
April 29, 2017, Joint CCRC, Orange County Republican Committee Golf Event,
details to follow
May 1, 2017, 8:30 am, FFRW Board Meeting, CCRC Office
May 15, 2017, 7 p.m., FFRW General Meeting, Saira Blair, member of the West
Virginia House of Delegates since 2014, elected as youngest lawmaker in the
country.; CORPS meeting at noon
June 5, 2017, 8:30 a.m. FFRW Board Meeting, CCRC Office
June 9, 2017, CulpeperFest at Eastern View High School 3-7pm; CCRC/FFRW
will have a booth; come visit us
June 13, Primary election for Virginia Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney
General. Vote!
June 19, 2017, 7 pm, FFRW General Meeting
Please Note
•
•
•
•
The candidates’ forum scheduled for April 30 was cancelled because many
candidates were unable to attend. Please note the Republican candidates
for state office pictured on page 9 and learn as much about them as you
can before the June 13 primary. (Chuck Smith, a Republican candidate for
Attorney General, was disqualified because he did not have sufficient valid
signatures from one or more districts.) Although the FFRW cannot endorse
a candidate until the Republican nominee is selected, you may individually
work for and support financially the candidate(s) of your choice.
FFRW members are invited to play in the Golf Tourney on April 29 at Meadows Farm. Non players can help in other capacities.
The family picnic in conjunction with the CCRC, originally scheduled for
May 21, will not be held on that date because all parks in the area have already been reserved.
At our June meeting, we are hoping to feature Mercedes and Matt Schlapp.
This meeting will be a very special one you will not want to miss.
3
A Summary of the March 20 FFRW Meeting with the NAACP
At our monthly FFRW meeting on March 20, we were very pleased to have as our guest speakers the current and immediate past presidents of the local NAACP Chapter (Culpeper, Madison, Rappahannock Counties). Mrs. Sandra Reaves Yates, the 2017 NAACP president, is a native of Culpeper who elected to leave
the area to complete her education, work for AT&T, and begin her entrepreneurial career. She returned to
Culpeper a few years ago and owns the N’Style Fashion Gallery on Main Street that several FFRW members frequent. Her brother, Sanford Reaves, the 2016 NAACP president and current vice president, is well
known in Culpeper. He graduated from Culpeper High School in 1974, is the pastor at Mount Zion Baptist
Church in Locust Grove, and has served on the Culpeper County Planning Commission for 25 years. (He is
now its chairman.) Recently, he was recognized for his community service by being named a Culpeper
Colonel, having been nominated by Jack Frazier and approved by the Board of Supervisors.
Although no Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the African-American
vote since the mid-1960s, we believe that the Republican Party and the NAACP—at least the local organizations—have many areas of agreement. Sandra’s theme for 2017 is “Embracing our Differences with Respect and Dignity”. Sanford led an area-wide service on Martin Luther King Day this year entitled, “Common
Ground”. The NAACP considers itself a bipartisan organization, and, indeed, several of its local members
and officers are white. Some FFRW/CCRC members have elected to join the NAACP.
Sandra and Sanford spoke of their experiences growing up in Culpeper at a time when opportunities for
black Americans were more limited and racial bias was more accepted than it is today. But even back in the
60s and 70s, they found many individuals in our community to be welcoming and encouraging. The audience appreciated their willingness to candidly discuss the problems they faced and the improvements they
see today.
Listed below are some of the areas where we thought we could find common ground. Sandra and Sanford
agreed with the list.
● Need for a forward-looking, ethical, transparent, accountable, and fiscally responsible local government that is
responsive to the citizens of Culpeper County.
● Need to get millennials more involved in our organizations, better educated on the issues, and more active politically.
● Need for strong families to provide support for the youth of our community and nation.
● Importance of a good educational system that: provides all students with the opportunity to maximize their potential; provides all students with an understanding of our nation’s history and institutions to help them become
active and responsible participants in our Constitutional republic; and offers preparation for a wide variety of
career paths.
● Need to revitalize the inner cities in our nation, many of which are burdened with poverty, high crime rates, failing schools, unemployment, single-parent households.
● Need to reform the criminal justice system to reduce incarceration and make sentencing more equitable.
● Need to support small businesses through reduced regulations and more favorable tax policies.
● At least most of the tenets of the Republican Creed of Virginia: We believe:
That the free enterprise system is the most productive supplier of human needs and economic justice,
That all individuals are entitled to equal rights, justice, and opportunities and should assume their responsibilities
as citizens in a free society,
That fiscal responsibility and budgetary restraints must be exercised at all levels of government,
That the Federal Government must preserve individual liberty by observing Constitutional limitations,
That peace is best preserved through a strong national defense,
That faith in God, as recognized by our Founding Fathers is essential to the moral fiber of the Nation.
We don’t expect to persuade NAACP members to vote Republican, but we think it was useful to spread
awareness of the Republican Creed and to begin a dialog that will make our community a better place to
live.
4
PRESIDENT’S CORNER
THE QUIET TRUMP SUPPORTERS
“I assume that you, like me, are appalled by what students at our colleges and
universities report that their professors have said to a classroom full of young
people, who presumably have a variety of political views. For example:
“Conservatives are cheap. They don’t want to pay taxes because they’ve already raped this country and gotten everything out of it they possibly could.”
“Conservatism champions racism, exploitation, and imperialist war.”
“I know today (the day after the November election) is a sad and scary day for
America, so I’ll just open the discussion today as a way for you guys to vent your
frustrations from the election results.”
Mr. Trump’s election victory “was an intentional dehumanization of marginalized populations.”
The rise of Donald Trump is just like the rise of Hitler.
“Donald Trump is a fool, already in hell, a clown, all of the answer choices for this question are correct, an evil man, the
Anti-Christ.”
Comments like this reflect not only a liberal, left-wing bias, but also intolerance and arrogance. Professors who make such
statements in class or on the internet, demonstrate a disregard for anyone in their class who might have a different opinion.
They apparently consider themselves and their views morally and intellectually superior to those who differ from them politically. Hillary Clinton infamously characterized Trump supporters as “a basket of deplorables—racist, sexist, homophobic,
xenophobic, Islamaphobic. You name it.” She, and her Democratic supporters, continue to consider those who didn’t support her to be politically unsophisticated, lacking education, angry, bitter, bigoted, and emotional. These professors share
that same condescending attitude; it seems they cannot even imagine that anyone in their class would think differently than
they do. Political diversity has no place in their classroom.
I have observed something similar in my everyday activities--activities that are, for the most part, non-political. The results
of the presidential election and recent polling show a polarized nation. About half the citizens like what President Trump is
doing (though they might prefer a little more discipline in his focus, his tweets and his off-the-cuff remarks). The other half
despises Trump on a personal level and opposes virtually everything he tries to do. It is inevitable that in almost any nonpolitical gathering, there will be people representing both sides of the divide. When in such a group, I am often curious
about who supports Trump and who opposes him, but am reluctant to make a remark or express a viewpoint that Trumphaters would find offensive. There is no chance of changing anyone’s mindset. On a few occasions, a casual conversation
with someone I don’t know well will elicit a clue that he or she also supports Trump; with that understanding, we are able to
talk openly and passionately about a variety of political topics of common interest.
I have noticed that the same sense of reserve is often not shared by those who hate Trump. Even in a county like Culpeper
that went decisively for Trump over Clinton in the November election, Trump haters seem to think that every intelligent person shares their views. At a meeting, luncheon, or sports gathering, they will sometimes freely express anti-Trump, antiRepublican, anti-conservative, or anti-Fox News sentiments, unconcerned that many in the group will find it offensive.
This is not surprising, given the vicious level of anti-Trump rhetoric they are exposed to in the mainstream media.
Even some comic strips, that are supposed to make us laugh, are blatantly anti-Trump. One unintended consequences of their remarks is that sometimes those of us who disagree can identify each other by a rolling of our
eyes or a shaking of our heads. Maybe we need a secret signal, handshake, or code to initiate contact with other Trump supporters—other members of the relatively silent majority that don’t demonstrate on the mall and that
the polls can’t seem to find.
5
April 2017 Chairman’s Corner
When was the last time you read the Federalist Papers?
Written before the Constitution was ratified, this body of work laid out how our government was expected to work in the future. They are full of ideas that are prescient with their understanding of how
our government actually works today. One comment was about large, thousand page plus bills that
become laws. Bills that long would be a form of tyranny because no one would know what was in the
bill. That was a warning that we have not heeded. Whole essays were devoted to problems with the
Supreme Court not being accountable to the people. Regretfully, there is no solution offered to this
problem in the Federalist Papers.
Fast forward to today. Before a single city has been designated by the federal government as being
subject to reduced federal grant money, a circuit judge ruled that the federal government can’t
‘whatever.’ (Before you can ask for an injunction, you have to have a harm that the injunction would
stop.) This is like the ruling that the President, in his role as Commander in Chief, cannot decide who
and what are potential threats to the US and exclude them from the US by denying visas. You know,
like if the Navy had decided to attack the incoming waves of Japanese combat aircraft at 7 am local,
before they dropped their first bomb, but a judge said “No, they have done no harm. You have to let
them go on. We are not at war with Japan.”
Those that regard the Constitution as something written by old, dead men and therefore out of date
might get some really good insights from the Federalist Papers. The Federalist papers provided reasons for limits to the scope of federal government. For example, it was considered laughable to consider the federal government concerned with local police matters and now the Justice Department actually runs local police departments. There are warnings in the Federalist Papers about unelected, unaccountable Justices of the Supreme Court, and, by extension judges that pretend to be legislators and
military commanders. And yet there is no will to correct the problem, even with blood in the streets
from those who occupy ‘sanctuary cities’.
Here is a source http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/ there are more.
They are a good read.
Chuck Duncan
(If you are interested in joining the CCRC, please come to the next meeting;
membership petitions will be available and can be completed at the meeting.
The CCRC is the local arm of the Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) and has the
lead role in supporting Republican conventions and campaigns in Culpeper
County.)
6
Chat with Brat—April 18 in Culpeper (next page)
Obamacare Repeal and Replace—FFRW Action Item
At the time of the March FFRW meeting, Paul Ryan was pushing for support of his Republican proposal to
“repeal and replace” Obamacare. Our 7th District Congressional Representative, Dave Brat, and most of the
Freedom Caucus to which Brat belongs, stood as a roadblock to passage of the bill. Brat’s primary objection
was that it did little or nothing to lower insurance rates and, thus, offered minimal improvement over the current healthcare program. Brat and his colleagues were under considerable pressure to vote for the measure,
and Brat appealed to organizations and individuals in the 7th District to register support for his position. After
lengthy discussion, it was moved and seconded that the FFRW should send a letter of support for his position, with the caveat that if the bill did pass, it should have a sunset clause so that a better, more conservative
approach could be negotiated a year or so down the road.
The FFRW board did not follow through with a letter of support for two reasons:
● The Obamacare repeal and replace legislation was a fast-moving train with an artificial deadline; it was
pulled from consideration a few days after our meeting because Ryan could not attract the necessary
votes for passage.
● Although the motion made at the March meeting appeared to pass with no objection, it became clear
from the email traffic that support within the FFRW was far from unanimous. Some of our active members thought it more important to pass the best legislation that could be attained now, rather than suffer an embarrassing failure to unify behind a central campaign promise. Others preferred that Brat
remain true to his principles (with which we agree) and vote against the bill.
As you all know, the Freedom Caucus received much of the blame for failure to pass the legislation, and it
appeared that no further near-term attempts to repeal and replace Obamacare were being contemplated.
Failure to realize savings from healthcare, complicates other legislation such as tax reform.
The situation remains murky. Much of the “Chat with Brat” session held on Tuesday April 18 in downtown
Culpeper was devoted to the healthcare debate that Brat termed “the elephant in the room”. After politely
dealing with a group of women who heckled him, laughed, and contradicted his claim that America’s
healthcare system was in a state of collapse, Brat reiterated his pledge to repeal the collapsing Affordable
Care Act. He said the House Freedom Caucus is determined to help the President follow through on that
promise. He looks to the free market system for the solution.
On Friday, April 21, Brat was on the Jimmy Barrett show and discussed the status of the health care bill. He
seemed very optimistic that agreement could be achieved. Here is an excerpt:
Jimmy Barrett: President Trump said he'd like to have a health care bill next week. Doable or not? Do you
think you can have a bill to him next week?
Dave Brat: Yes, I do Jimmy...we're still waiting on the text, but President Trump came over and negotiated
with us in good faith, and our group got together, and Vice President Pence came over with some amendments to the bill. The main thing is just draining the swamp, and that means taking some of the power out of
D.C. and cracking the door open to let states deal with some of the insurance regulations so that we can finally get the price down for people. ....and so, we think we're at a yes, the White House wants it, we've been
compromising with all the moderate groups ...The mainstream media always makes a big deal about all the
infighting between the groups, but that's not really [going on]... Right now it's just all about following solid Republican principles and I think we're there.
Jimmy Barrett: Personally, I don't mind the infighting because at least it shows you're trying to get it right.
Democrats have a tendency to walk in lockstep on any bill that's out there, regardless of whether they agree
with what's in it or not...
Dave Brat: ...... What we don't want is people gaming the system. We're trying to do the regulations the right
way so someone can't game the system and to make sure it's fair to everybody. And to get back to the preObamacare days where people could buy a healthcare premium that was affordable, without a $10,000 deductible. Does anybody remember those days? I hope you do, we're trying to get you back there.
Stay tuned. There are a lot of complicating factors—moderate Republicans, tax reform, funding for the wall,
government shutdown—and then there is the Senate.
7
Opioid Addiction—a Concern for Culpeper
At the March FFRW meeting, Thunder Lane asked that we examine issues related to the local opioid epidemic—in particular, the availability and cost of overdose reversal drugs. As we learned more about opioid usage, it became clear that we should dedicate a future program to the topic. The headline story in
the April 17 edition of the Culpeper Star Exponent was “Culpeper County Leads Two Ominous Categories”. According to an authoritative study, Culpeper has the ominous distinction of leading the Fredericksburg region in two lethal categories of premature death—one of which is death by drugs. Culpeper
County residents died at an annual rate of 28 per 100,000 from drugs. That is one of the highest rates
recorded in the state and about 2 ½ times the national average. One deputy sheriff described Culpeper
as “ground zero” for the opioid epidemic. Between 2013 and 2015, 41 people in Culpeper died from
overdoses; most of them resulted from addiction to opioid, a substance found in prescription pain medicine, and illegal drugs such as heroin. Statewide and national trends show that the problem continues to
get worse as even stronger drugs such as fentanyl are substituted for heroin.
Official HHS statistics tell the story. On an average day in the U.S.: more than 650,000 opioid prescriptions are dispensed; 3,900 people initiate non-medical use of prescription opioids; 580 people initiate heroin use; and 78 people die from an opioid-related overdose. In 2015, 52,000 Americans died of overdoses—about four times as many as died from gun homicides and 50% more than died from car accidents.
The death rate is much greater than it was for the heroin scourge of the 1970s or the crack epidemic of
the 1980s, and drug deaths are no longer confined to the underworld or the projects. It is now an “equalopportunity disease” that can strike all races and economic levels.
The history of the opioid epidemic is fascinating. It began in the late 1990s when libertarian attitudes and
a massive corporate marketing effort combined to encourage doctors to prescribe (and patients to demand) the addictive medications. The American Pain Foundation, largely funded by medical companies,
advocated the use of opioids for patients with chronic pain. Today, more than one-third of Americans are
prescribed painkillers every year. Massive quantities of addictive drugs such as OxyContin were released to the population at large. Heroin became an economical and readily obtainable substitute to prescribed painkillers.
Government at all levels is beginning to recognize and tackle the problem. The federal government’s
HHS Opioid Initiative targets three key areas: prescriber education and limitations; medical-assisted
treatment of addicted individuals; and access to overdose reversal drugs such as Naloxone. The President’s budget requests $1.1 billion in new mandatory and discretionary investments over the FY 20172018 period to expand access to treatment and prevent opioid misuse and abuse. Virginia’s governor
signed over a dozen new laws this year related to opioid prescriptions and Naloxone. (These laws were
bipartisan with unanimous support in both the Senate and House of Delegates.) Sheriff Jenkins is requesting several new staff members to confront opioid-related problems.
Our program committee wants to put together a program later this year that will address the local budgetary, law enforcement, and medical treatment implications of the opioid epidemic. It should be of concern
to everyone in the community.
8
Republican Candidates for State Office
The FFRW does not endorse a candidate for the Republican nomination until
the official nominee has been determined.
Candidates for Governor
Ed Gillespie
Corey Stewart
Frank Wagner
Candidates for Lieutenant Governor
Glenn Davis
Bryce Reeves
Jill Vogel
Presumptive Republican
Nominee for Attorney General
John Adams
9
A Summary of Obama-Era Surveillance
Sharyl Attkisson, the former acclaimed investigative CBS journalist, has compiled a timeline that documents
known Obama administration attempts to surveil U.S. citizens—particularly those individuals or groups who
opposed the administration and its policies. Ms. Attkisson is also the author of a 2014 book entitled
“Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s
Washington”. It is a harrowing real-life account that brings to light the erosion of First Amendment rights in
the United States. The timeline and book are personal to Ms. Attkisson whose computers and phone lines
were hacked and bugged by a very sophisticated organization while she was pursuing the truth behind Fast
and Furious and Benghazi.
The timeline is a lengthy, chronological account that reveals a pattern of Obama administration efforts to use
the intelligence agencies, the IRS, and other instruments of power to promote an agenda and silence critics.
What follows is a rearrangement of the information in the timeline to highlight its recurring themes. The complete timeline can be found on Ms. Attkisson’s website.
● Policy changes. A string of policy decisions and government actions that facilitated intrusion, surveillance, and public exposure of U.S. citizens, usually as the result of “incidental” collection.
— In October 2011, the Obama administration secretly changed policy, creating a loophole that
allowed NSA to conduct back-door searches or incidental collection of U.S. citizens’ domestic
communications.
— In spring 2012, the Department of Justice and FBI announce the vast expansion of cyber- related efforts to address national security related cyber issues. In July 2012, the Department of
Justice designated US Attorneys’ offices to act as force multipliers in stepping up cyber efforts
in the name of national security. Stepped up cyber efforts included specialized and expanded
training for several organizations within the government.
— In October 2012, a top secret presidential directive ordered intelligence to draw up a list of
overseas targets for cyber-attacks. The Guardian reported that the possible use of cyber actions inside the US was contemplated.
— In December 2012, two Democratic members of the Senate Intelligence Committee warned of
a back-door search loophole (incidental collection) that could be used to obtain information on
specific, innocent Americans without a warrant.
— In April 2013, FISA secretly approved the FBI request to continue to collect daily telephone records of millions of US Verizon customers. Verizon was ordered to turn over information to the
NSA.
— In December 2015, the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) passed. It required private internet companies to “transmit cyber threat indicators” to the Department of Homeland
Security. It provided immunity from prosecution for sharing personal data.
— On January 12, 2017, a week before leaving office, Obama finalized new rules allowing NSA to
spread certain intelligence information to 16 other US intelligence agencies without normal privacy protections.
● Stonewalling. A pattern of denials and false statements (“stonewalling”) by administration officials
such as Brennan, Clapper, Holder, Rice, and Lois Lerner. Many of the statements were later retracted after contradictory information became known. For example:
10
(continued from previous page)
— In December 2011, the Department of Justice had to retract a letter submitted in February that denied the allegations of Fast and Furious gunrunning. In June 2012, Holder was held in contempt
by the House for not turning over Fast and Furious documents.
— In March 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated that intelligence was not
collecting mass data on tens of millions of Americans. After Snowden’s release of government
memos showing otherwise, Clapper apologized in July for his false testimony.
● IRS Targeting of Conservative Groups. IRS targeting, harassment, and threatened prosecution of conservative groups leading up to the 2012 election. After many denials, the IRS finally admitted to the targeting of Tea Party groups, but only after the election in May 2013.
● Targeting of Journalists. Specific targeting of journalists who were getting information from whistleblowers or confidential ‘inside-the-beltway’ sources and/or printing materials that were damaging to the
Obama agenda.
— Sharyl Attkisson: In February 2012, a remote intruder downloaded new spy software, proprietary
to a federal agency, into Sharyl Attkisson’s work computer; in July, the intruders “refreshed” the
surveillance software. In December 2012, Ms. Attkisson was warned by two sources that she
was likely under government surveillance due to her reporting, and a forensic exam of the computer revealed the intrusion, as well as attempts to erase the evidence. An FBI investigation into
the intrusion was opened in June 2013 under the auspices of national security. CBS was contacted, but Ms. Attkisson was not. The FBI has resisted Sharyl’s attempts to examine her file.
CBS News confirmed the intrusions.
— James Rosen: In May 2010, the government secretly applied for a warrant for the release of information collected by Google on Fox newscaster James Rosen pursuant to a leak investigation. In
May 2013, Fox News learned that the Department of Justice had labeled James Rosen as a possible “criminal co-conspirator” and a “flight risk” in obtaining warrants to monitor his State Department movements, his phone records, and his emails in a leak investigation begun in 2011.
— The Associated Press: In May 2013, the AP announced that the Justice Department had secretly
subpoenaed the phone records of 20 AP reporters, as part of a leak investigation. Attorney General Holder had approved the subpoenas issued to Verizon, in what was termed a “massive and
unprecedented intrusion into news gathering operations”.
● Targeting of Congress. Specific targeting of members of Congress, including Intelligence Committee
members and other individuals, usually related to Obama policy objectives.
— Rep Harmon. In April 2009, someone intentionally unmasked and leaked the name of Representative Jane Harmon who had phone conversations with pro-Israeli lobbyists under investigation for espionage.
— Congressman Kucinich. In the spring of 2011, Obama intelligence officials captured and recorded incidental private conversations between Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich and a
Libyan official; the recordings were later leaked to the press. Kucinich learned of the intrusion
several years later and stepped forward in March 2017 to support the plausibility of Trump’s wiretapping allegation. (Kucinich opposed the invasion of Libya.)
— Senate Intelligence Committee. In March 2014, Congress accused the CIA of improperly accessing Senate Intelligence Committee computers. The charge was denied by CIA chief John
Brennan, but the CIA Inspector General found that five CIA officials had improperly accessed
Senate Intelligence Committee computers and searched staff emails.
11
(continued from previous page)
— Netanyahu and the Iran Deal. In the spring of 2015, Obama intelligence officials “incidentally”
captured communications of U.S. Congressmen and organizations in the U.S. while secretly recording Netanyahu’s discussion of the pending deal with Iran—a deal that Netanyahu vehemently opposed.
— Equivocation. When, in Congressional hearings in 2013-2014, senators asked if NSA spied on
members of Congress, they were told by Eric Holder that the question should be addressed in
private; the NSA provided no direct answer.
● Targeting of the Trump Campaign. The continuing saga of intelligence gathering related to Russia
and the Trump campaign, along with the ‘incidental’ administration casualties.
— Carter Page. In the summer of 2016, around the time that Trump officially became the Republican nominee, the FBI obtained a secret FISA court order to monitor Carter Page, who peripherally and briefly served as a Trump advisor, based on probable cause that he was acting as a
Russian agent. The surveillance could allow incidental collection of communication of Trump
and his associates if they communicated with Page.
— Susan Rice. At about the same time, internal White House logs show that National Security Advisor Susan Rice began to show increased interest in NSA materials, including the unmasking of
American identities. Susan Rice’s interest in NSA materials accelerated after the November
2016 election, continuing until the inauguration in January. Surveillance targets of interest included Trump’s transition team and/or foreign officials discussing the Trump administration. Rice
was identified as the source of the “unmasking” of US citizens. She first denied any knowledge
of the unmasking, then later claimed it was a normal part of her job and not political.
— The Dossier. In the fall of 2016, Trump opponents shopped a political-opposition research dossier that alleged Trump was guilty of inappropriate acts regarding Russia. A copy went to the FBI.
In January 2017, the unverified dossier with many known inaccuracies was leaked and published
by BuzzFeed.
— LtGen Flynn. In February 2017, an FBI recording involving a conversation between LtGen Flynn
and the Russian ambassador was illegally leaked to the press. Although there appears to be
nothing incriminating in the conversation, Flynn resigned because he had not been as forthcoming as he should have been with Vice President Pence.. (Flynn has other issues, so perhaps it is
fortunate for the Trump administration that he was unmasked and railroaded to resign.)
— Attorney General Sessions. It was revealed that Attorney General Sessions had met with the
Russian ambassador twice in the recent past. Again, although there appeared to be nothing improper or unusual in those contacts, pressure was put on Sessions to recuse himself from the
Russian collusion investigation (or even resign). He did recuse himself.
— Representative Nunes. Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, revealed that he
had reviewed evidence of Trump associates being incidentally surveilled and their names being
leaked. His decision to inform the President and temporarily bypass committee channels,
caused the Democrats to demand he step down from the Russian investigation. He did so.
12
Some of President Trump’s Accomplishments to Date—Part 2
(Part 1 appeared in the March FFRW Newsletter)
Military. On April 6, President Trump ordered a one-time airstrike against A Syrian airbase,
firing 60 cruise missiles in response to the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons on
its people. This was the first direct U.S. military action against the Assad regime, and received bipartisan and international support. Generals fighting ISIS began taking greater responsibility for the planning and conduct of operations. On April 13, the U.S. dropped a GBU43B (also known as the MOAB), the largest non-nuclear bomb in existence, on a complex of
ISIS tunnels in Afghanistan. The bomb is estimated to have killed about 100 ISIS fighters.
Abortion/Planned Parenthood. On April 13,Trump signed a Congressional Review bill into
law annulling a pending Obama Administration regulation that would have required states to
fund abortion organizations such as Planned Parenthood. On April 4, the Trump administration halted U.S. funding of the U.N. Population Fund that has link to inhumane abortion programs, shifting the $32.5 million to the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Illegal Immigration. On March 31, after taking a tough stance against sanctuary cities and
illegal immigration, Attorney General Sessions announced a plan to speed up the deportation
of imprisoned illegals. On April 11, Sessions issued a memorandum to U.S. attorneys instructing them to enforce much stricter guidelines against immigration crimes and announced
that the Justice Department would hire 125 immigration judges in the next two years.
Energy. On March 28, Trump signed a major executive order repealing several Obama-era
regulations unfavorable to coal. The order also started an immediate review of Obama’s
Clean Power Plan with the goals of helping to create American energy jobs, stimulating domestic energy production and independence, and returning more authority to the states.
United Nations/Israel. In March, the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia
authored a destructive, anti-Semitic report against Israel. The report and agency were
strongly criticized by the U.S. and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, and the executive director of
the commission resigned in response.
Reduced Regulation. On March 27, President Trump signed four bills undoing Obama-era regulations. Two of the bills rolled back federal education regulations. One of them repealed Obama-era
requirements (Blacklisting Rule) for federal contractors that would have given unionized contractors
an upper-hand. On March 31, Trump signed a bill undoing an Obama-era regulation and giving
power back to the states to expand drug testing for unemployment benefit applicants.
Appointments. Neil Gorsuch occupied the vacant Antonin Scalia seat on the Supreme
Court, thus fulfilling a major campaign promise to nominate a conservative, originalist justice.
Trump’s cabinet nominees were approved after an unprecedented delay. This is the most
conservative cabinet, at least in recent U.S. history. The unorthodox cabinet includes true
conservatives, small-government proponents, and outsiders—many of whom are prepared to
challenge the usual way of doing business. David Friedman, a strong supporter of Israel, was
confirmed as Ambassador to Israel.
Diplomacy. Progress seems to have been made in enlisting China’s support to discourage
North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. An American woman, held in Egypt for 3 years on trumpedup charges, was released,.
13
2017 Virginia General Assembly Session—Governor McAuliffe Vetoes
As another example of the partisanship that dominates Virginia state (as well as
national) politics, Governor McAuliffe vetoed a record 40 bills sent to his desk
after being passed by both houses of the state legislature during the 2017 session. During his four year tenure , he vetoed over 90 bills, almost double the
number of vetoes of the last three governors (Warner, Kaine, McDonnell) combined. Most of the bills that were vetoed involved such hot-button issues as
electoral integrity, school choice, religious freedom, illegal immigration, and gun
control. The rationale for the vetoes generally reiterated Democratic talking
points. With the Senate closely divided, the governor’s vetoes could not be
overturned.
Session
1998
Governor
Vetoes
Total Sent to Governor
147
24
939
1999
118
13
1,062
2000
60
16
1,089
2001
91
7
882
74
1
899
2003
87
4
1,046
2004
60
2
1.035
2005
45
1
949
123
7
958
2007
106
10
958
2008
36
1
889
2009
101
12
886
102
0
871
2011
132
5
892
2012
113
7
855
2013
85
6
812
57
5
834
2015
68
17
800
2016
57
29
811
2017
83
40
880
1998
2006
2010
2014
Gilmore
Amendments
Warner
Kaine
McDonnell
McAuliffe
14
The FFRW is Filled with
Intelligent & Witty People
We want to hear from you!
This is the home of our “opinions” page. Please share
your opinions, concerns and ideas about local, State, and
Federal issues, or anything else you feel compelled to
share.
The Eugenics Roots of Planned Parenthood—by Linda Halevy
The abortion industry, and the central role Planned Parenthood plays in it, has long been a very hot button item for me. I am
proudly pro-life, and believe that abortions should only be performed under extreme circumstancesy. I certainly do not want my tax
dollars used to support abortion. The largest chain of abortion clinics in the United States is operated by Planned Parenthood, which
does receive federal and state support for its contributions to “women’s health”. The origins of Planned Parenthood are linked to a
very dark, racially oppressive chapter in American history, and the current activities of that organization, intentionally or unintentionally, contribute to the discredited goals of that period.
The documentary film Maafa 21, supplemented by my own research, is a major source for this article. The documentary makes it
clear that the roots of Planned Parenthood are closely tied to the worldwide eugenics movement that sought to improve the genetic
quality of the human population through a variety of means. Eugenics presumes that reproduction should be encouraged among
people with “desirable traits” and discouraged among people with “undesirable traits”. People deemed unfit to reproduce often included people with mental or physical disabilities, criminals, and racial or religious groups that were considered inferior. The most
notorious example was Hitler’s Nazi Germany, where the eugenics movement targeted blacks, as well as Jews, for extinction in order to purify the race. Hitler was greatly influenced by the eugenics movement in the United States, and, conversely, American eugenicists praised Hitler’s sterilization of some 600 women whose children had been fathered by Negroes. In their view, mixed
breeds were a menace and the greatest problem and most destructive force confronting the white race and American civilization.
In America, the eugenics movement arose in the mid-1800s in response to fears that emancipation of the slaves would result in insurrection, destruction of the economy, higher taxes, increased crime, and interracial relationships. An effort to send the slaves back
to Africa was funded by the U.S. Congress but proved unworkable. A group of wealthy, white elitists felt that African Americans
were inferior mentally and physically and could not possibly make it on their own. In 1883, Francis Galton, the father of eugenics
and half-cousin of Charles Darwin, defined eugenics as “the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair
the racial quality of future generations”. He urged both positive and negative eugenics measures to control the population. Education, tax incentives, and childbirth stipends are examples of positive measures that could be used to encourage procreation among
fit (white) people and discourage procreation among the black population. Negative eugenics could take the form of marriage restrictions, segregation, sexual sterilization, or even euthanasia and murder (as in Nazi Germany).
In the U.S., laws were passed to prohibit marriage by people with diseases or other undesirable hereditary conditions. Marriage
between people of different races was banned to prevent miscegenation. When laws failed to prevent extramarital procreation between the races, eugenicists argued for more intrusive intervention. Individuals judged “unfit” might be segregated by sex in institutions such as insane asylums, sanatoriums or homes for the feeble minded. Many social reformers argued that compulsory sterilization was more humane (and less costly) than locking people up in institutions. Words like “feeble-minded”, “imbecile”, “immoral” or
“criminal”, rather than race, were used to characterize candidates for sterilization.
In 1907, Indiana became the first of 30 states to pass forced sterilization laws. Some of those laws stayed on the books until the late
1970s. In fact, the State of Oregon did its last sterilization in 1981 and did not abolish its eugenics board until 1983. Many other
states used forced sterilization even though a law was never adopted or a eugenics board established. Therefore, no records were
kept or released. In the states that did release their records, the records showed that more than 60,000 Americans were sterilized
and those disproportionately were black. A federal judge estimated that there were at least another 150,000 low income women
who were sterilized under federal government programs alone. It was not uncommon for social workers to threaten recipients with
15
“
the loss of their welfare benefits if they did not agree to be sterilized, and, in some cases, did not also bring their children in for sterilization. There are reports of cases as young as 10 years of age.
Birth control, when it became available, and abortion, which is now legal, are, of course, other, more acceptable ways to limit procreation. Birth control was the focus of Margaret Sanger’s efforts in the 1900s; abortion is now a primary tool of Planned Parenthood to
end unwanted pregnancies.
In the 1920s, the eugenics movement was very active in the U.S., and Margaret Sanger became its primary crusader. In 1921 she
founded the American Birth Control League that, 20 years later, morphed into Planned Parenthood Foundation of America. Margaret
Sanger was careful not to characterize her programs as having a racial purpose. Rather, she said the feeble-minded, unfit, immoral
and criminal should never have been born at all, and she was trying to rid the world of the likes of these. In 1927 Margaret Sanger
organized the World Population Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, where colleagues of the American Eugenics Society had prominent roles. Among these was Eugen Fisher who was the leader of concentration camps in Africa where blacks were rounded up and
executed. He was one of the first Nazi scientists to become publicly affiliated with the Carnegie-funded eugenics laboratory in Cold
Spring Harbor, NY, and later with the Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. It is here that many of the racial
purity programs were developed.
In 1942, the American Birth Control League officially became known as Planned Parenthood. As the atrocities of the Nazis came to
light, it became necessary to move away from affiliation with Nazi leaders and programs and away from words like “control” in favor
of words like “planning”. The same people were in control, still obsessed with race and dedicated to eugenics. Defenders of Margaret Sanger often try to hide her racism by saying she was not a eugenicist and that Planned Parenthood is not part of the eugenics
movement, but the truth is, that as late as 1956, the American Eugenics Society listed Margaret Sanger as one of its members. In
addition, many of Margaret Sanger’s colleagues and people whose writings she published, as well as the officers of Planned
Parenthood, were known to be members. Margaret Sanger is quoted as saying “the eugenic and civilization value of birth control is
becoming apparent to the enlightened and the intelligent. The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical in ideal with the final aim of eugenics. I consider that the world and almost all of our civilization for the next 25 years is
going to depend upon a simple, cheap, safe contraceptive to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles, and among the most ignorant people. Even this will not be sufficient, because I believe that now, immediately, there should be national sterilization for certain
dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.” This
was from a personal letter to Katherine Dexter McCormick, an heir to the International Harvester fortune, who would later use part of
her enormous wealth to fund the development of the birth control pill.
Concerned that judges would rule forced sterilization unconstitutional, Margaret Sanger and the eugenics community viewed the birth
control pill as the perfect solution for controlling the unfit, unproductive, and lazy segments of the population. However, while the
white population generally accepted the birth control pill, blacks were less eager to accept it, even though the vast majority of American Birth Control League/Planned Parenthood facilities were located in black neighborhoods. Perhaps they became suspicious of
the connection between birth control and other methods such as forced sterilization to limit black reproduction.
In 1934 Margaret Sanger, in a Planned Parenthood funded proposal, recommended to the United States government that a woman
should not have the right to have a child without a permit from the government, and that these permits should be good for only one
child. There was even discussion as to putting birth control in the water systems in urban areas. While this proved impractical, all
these measures laid the foundation for the next phase of their plan: Abortion
In America today, the number one cause of death to African Americans is abortion. Since 1973, legal abortions have killed more
African Americans than Aids, cancer, heart disease, diabetes and violent crime combined. Every week, more blacks die in American
abortion clinics than were killed in the entire Viet Nam war. Planned Parenthood, which continues to operate most of its clinics in
minority neighborhoods, kills as many African American babies every 4 days as the Ku Klux Klan killed in 150 years. Abortion kills
five times as many black babies per year as white babies. Today, the most dangerous place for an African American is in the womb
of its African American mother.
In view of these facts, it seems strange to me that abortion and Planned Parenthood funding should be so strongly supported by the
Democratic Party and the 85-90% of black Americans that consistently vote Democratic. Hillary Clinton has expressed her admiration for Margaret Sanger. Our Democratic governor has vetoed all attempts to limit Planned Parenthood funding. Black Lives Matter
has shown no interest in the black lives that are sacrificed in abortion clinics. Evidence that Planned Parenthood was illegally harvesting and selling fetus’ organs was ignored by the Obama administration. Martin Luther King Jr.’s niece, Alveda King, has said:
“Somewhere along the way this has become a white issue, or a conservative issue, or a Republican issue, and therefore not an issue
we (the black community) need to be concerned about. This same attitude has allowed Planned Parenthood and other members of
the abortion industry to carry out this genocide right under our noses. In some areas of the United States, more babies are being
aborted than are being born”.
16
We Invite You to Join Us
$30 full member/$15 associate member
Send your name, address,
phone, e-mail and a check
payable to FFRW to:
FFRW Attn:Treasurer
P.O. Box 163
Culpeper, VA 22701
Comments, suggestions, contributions to this newsletter are welcome.
Visit our Website
Like us on Facebook
Contact us @: [email protected]
[email protected]