Hey Liberals, Here’s How One Truly Escapes Poverty…And It Doesn’t Involve Handouts

Books and pencils, not money.

That’s how you truly escape poverty.

American liberals still don’t understand that simple concept, but millions of poor people living in the sprawling slums of Nairobi do.

They know it’s much better to be given an education instead of a handout.

I’ve seen how the urban poor think in Kenya. I’ve been to Nairobi with my wife Colleen, who is a travel agent.

When she takes 24 wealthy clients to Kenya for a safari, she always makes it a point to take them to a remarkable private school in the middle of Nairobi’s slums.

The school has been created by a luxury safari company from England for kids whose families can’t afford the high costs of attending Kenya’s “free” public schools.

The school is administered by AmericaShare, the nonprofit arm of Micato Safaris, which pays for the education of one child for every safari it sells. In 25 years, Micato has paid for the education of thousands of poor Kenyan kids.

When my wife takes her First World tourists into the slums in their Land Rovers, they are usually shocked, appalled, or scared half to death.

They think they already knew what urban poverty looked like because they had seen the bad parts of Baltimore, Chicago, or Los Angeles, where being a poor person means not having an iPhone 6 Plus.

But in Nairobi, they were seeing real Third World poverty on a massive scale.

Four million destitute people from Kenya and the surrounding countries are packed into Nairobi’s crowded slums. About 800,000 are in the neighborhood called Mukuru.

When I went there on one of my wife’s trips about three years ago, I was amazed and deeply affected by the poverty I saw. No one with a heart could not be.

Squalid living conditions, malnutrition, sickness and disease, children who should be in school combing through garbage dumps — that’s the kind of poverty there is in Nairobi.

You can’t see the government corruption and incompetence that created and perpetuates Kenya’s mass poverty, but they’re always present too.

When an American liberal sees how bad the poverty is in Nairobi, he feels sorry for the poor people and wants to hand them money — usually someone else’s.

But I noticed something. The people I met in Mukuru were smarter than American liberals when it came to helping poor kids.

Those in Nairobi who asked us for our help said, “Please don’t give us money. That will just keep us living here. Give us books and an education. That’s the way we can get out of this slum.”

The AmericaShare school is equally impressive. The kids wear uniforms. They’re taught English. Why English? Because it’s the language of success.

Some of the kids walk 3 kilometers through the slum to get to school — which is probably not as dangerous as doing so in the United States.

The kids at the AmericaShare school are dirt poor, or they wouldn’t be there. But they’re not mad at society.

They’re not killing each other. They don’t see themselves as victims of a bad system of government, though in fact that’s exactly what they are.

Somehow, those lucky school kids and their parents understand the value and the power of pencils and books.

They know that getting an education will change their lives and allow them to lift themselves out of poverty forever. And they know it’s up to them to earn it.

In the United States, we have people in power who still think the best way to help the inner-city poor is to throw even more government dollars into social welfare programs.

We’ve spent upwards of $22 trillion over the last 50 years on the War on Poverty, most of which went for the salaries of the bureaucrats and social workers who fought it.

All that money didn’t end poverty in America. It just created a permanent entitlement class who, unlike the poor of Nairobi, will never learn why pencils and books are more important than handouts.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Here’s Why Baltimore Burned…

Liberals have been the biggest losers in the Baltimore Blame Game.

For a week, they’ve been saying a lot of stupid things about the cause of the riots in Baltimore.

— They said the wild night of rioting, looting, and burning by young black men was caused by Freddie Gray’s death, which was supposedly yet another example of our country’s racist policing methods–even though three of the six cops indicted were black.

— They said the rioting in Baltimore was caused by the inner-city’s bad economy or the shortage of jobs that’ll pay high school dropouts with no skills $15 an hour.

— They said the rioting was caused by the mass incarceration of black men, the growing wage gap between rich and poor, Republican cuts in social spending, underfunded schools, and the legacy of slavery.

Whatever.

Every knee-jerk liberal in America blamed the lawlessness that went on in Baltimore on something dead wrong. I bet some college professor on an NPR panel show blamed the riots on fracking.

Except for Juan Williams on Fox, I’ve not heard one liberal even hint that he understood the underlying cause of those riots in Baltimore.

It’s the dysfunctional black family, stupids.

I didn’t hear one liberal pundit point out that most of the young men who did the torching and rock-throwing in Baltimore had no fathers present in their homes or even in their lives.

Everyone cheered that tough Baltimore mother, Toya Graham, when she slapped her 16-year-old son upside the head after she caught him wearing a mask and throwing rocks during the “protests.”

She became everyone’s “Mother of the Year” — for about 20 hours.

Then the jobless single mother of six was called a child abuser by liberals. She was even accused of justifying police brutality by Salon’s resident logician, Joan Walsh.

Yes, Toya Graham did the right thing. And she accidentally did it on camera for the rest of the world to see and applaud.

But her actions should have begged some important questions in the liberal media, like, “Where the heck were all the other mothers in Baltimore’s black community?”

Or, more important, “Where were the damn fathers?”

Why weren’t a few older guys seen on TV protecting store fronts or swatting their rock-throwing sons and pulling them home by their collars?

They’re permanently AWOL, that’s why. And that’s why so many young boys seek their male role models in drug gangs.

Too many American kids of all colors — about 20 million — are growing up without fathers in their homes.

But the black family has suffered most of all, and most of their blood is on the hands of liberal Democrats and big-government bureaucrats. Their do-good social welfare policies have penalized married, two-parent families and subsidized single mothers for five decades.

In 1960, five years before LBJ declared his doomed War on Poverty, one in four black kids was living in a house without their father present. Now, the number is seven in 10.

On top of that, the percentage of Americans living below the poverty rate is still what it was $22 trillion federal dollars ago — 15 percent.

The problems resulting from broken black families are nothing new or unexpected.

In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a brainy Democrat social scientist in the LBJ administration who became a U.S. Senator, warned us that the black family was breaking apart for a bunch of serious economic and social reasons.

Unemployment among black males was rising as increasing numbers of black women were going on welfare. He predicted those numbers would only get worse, and they did.

In what became known as “The Moynihan Report,” he warned also that more and more broken black families were going to create serious problems for the black community and its culture, which they did.

Moynihan got lots of grief from his fellow liberals back then. And of course, he was branded a racist and an anti-feminist.

But he saw Toya Graham and her fatherless sons coming 50 years ago. If Moynihan were alive today, he might say they’re a good symbol of why Baltimore went up in flames.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Here’s Why Baltimore Burned…

Liberals have been the biggest losers in the Baltimore Blame Game.

For a week, they’ve been saying a lot of stupid things about the cause of the riots in Baltimore.

— They said the wild night of rioting, looting, and burning by young black men was caused by Freddie Gray’s death, which was supposedly yet another example of our country’s racist policing methods–even though three of the six cops indicted were black.

— They said the rioting in Baltimore was caused by the inner-city’s bad economy or the shortage of jobs that’ll pay high school dropouts with no skills $15 an hour.

— They said the rioting was caused by the mass incarceration of black men, the growing wage gap between rich and poor, Republican cuts in social spending, underfunded schools, and the legacy of slavery.

Whatever.

Every knee-jerk liberal in America blamed the lawlessness that went on in Baltimore on something dead wrong. I bet some college professor on an NPR panel show blamed the riots on fracking.

Except for Juan Williams on Fox, I’ve not heard one liberal even hint that he understood the underlying cause of those riots in Baltimore.

It’s the dysfunctional black family, stupids.

I didn’t hear one liberal pundit point out that most of the young men who did the torching and rock-throwing in Baltimore had no fathers present in their homes or even in their lives.

Everyone cheered that tough Baltimore mother, Toya Graham, when she slapped her 16-year-old son upside the head after she caught him wearing a mask and throwing rocks during the “protests.”

She became everyone’s “Mother of the Year” — for about 20 hours.

Then the jobless single mother of six was called a child abuser by liberals. She was even accused of justifying police brutality by Salon’s resident logician, Joan Walsh.

Yes, Toya Graham did the right thing. And she accidentally did it on camera for the rest of the world to see and applaud.

But her actions should have begged some important questions in the liberal media, like, “Where the heck were all the other mothers in Baltimore’s black community?”

Or, more important, “Where were the damn fathers?”

Why weren’t a few older guys seen on TV protecting store fronts or swatting their rock-throwing sons and pulling them home by their collars?

They’re permanently AWOL, that’s why. And that’s why so many young boys seek their male role models in drug gangs.

Too many American kids of all colors — about 20 million — are growing up without fathers in their homes.

But the black family has suffered most of all, and most of their blood is on the hands of liberal Democrats and big-government bureaucrats. Their do-good social welfare policies have penalized married, two-parent families and subsidized single mothers for five decades.

In 1960, five years before LBJ declared his doomed War on Poverty, one in four black kids was living in a house without their father present. Now, the number is seven in 10.

On top of that, the percentage of Americans living below the poverty rate is still what it was $22 trillion federal dollars ago — 15 percent.

The problems resulting from broken black families are nothing new or unexpected.

In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a brainy Democrat social scientist in the LBJ administration who became a U.S. Senator, warned us that the black family was breaking apart for a bunch of serious economic and social reasons.

Unemployment among black males was rising as increasing numbers of black women were going on welfare. He predicted those numbers would only get worse, and they did.

In what became known as “The Moynihan Report,” he warned also that more and more broken black families were going to create serious problems for the black community and its culture, which they did.

Moynihan got lots of grief from his fellow liberals back then. And of course, he was branded a racist and an anti-feminist.

But he saw Toya Graham and her fatherless sons coming 50 years ago. If Moynihan were alive today, he might say they’re a good symbol of why Baltimore went up in flames.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Anyone Else Sick Of Hearing About Hillary 24/7?

We’re just a week into her long, slow victory trot to the Democrats’ 2016 presidential nomination; and already, I’m sick of the media coverage of Hillary Clinton.

You can’t escape her. She’s everywhere.

And I’m not talking about the usual hugs and kisses she’s been getting from her idolaters and cheerleaders in the liberal mainstream news media.

I’m talking about the conservative media outlets — Fox News and the radio talk shows.

It’s been all-Hillary-all-the-time for 10 days. I’m the biggest anti-Hillary guy I know, but I’m tired of listening to Fox and talk radio beat up on her so much.

I know they have to keep their conservative choirs happy with nonstop Hillary bash-fests. But they’re way overdoing it.

Apparently, they have nothing else to talk about besides Hillary.

I did an interview Wednesday morning with a conservative talk show, and the first question I got was about her.

I said that if conservative outlets would stop talking about Hillary, almost no one would mention her name.

I’m not kidding. I’m going to ask my friend Brent Bozell III of the Media Research Center to compare how many times the name ‘Hillary’ is heard on liberal outlets versus conservative outlets. I guarantee she’s getting more airtime from conservatives.

I understand talk radio is all about getting higher ratings.

I also realize there are a few million people out there who are frustrated by eight years of Obama and who enjoy nothing better than hearing Hillary being bashed 24/7 by conservatives.

But beating up on Hillary so heavily now is a waste of valuable conservative airtime, and it might backfire in the election next year.

Everyone can see already that she’ll be a certain loser in 2016. Even her fellow Democrats are nervous. She’s washed up. She’s all failure and scandal and deceitfulness.

On top of that, she’s gone beyond predictable. She’s already said everything she’s ever going to say — a hundred times — and she never had anything to say in the first place.

And anyway, Hillary’s old, old news. Is there anything about her we don’t know yet? If she discovers a new mole on her arm at noon, we’ll hear about it tonight on the evening news.

Beating on Hillary is great fun, I admit. But conservatives should be careful not to be too rough on her too soon.

She’s the best (i.e., the weakest and worst) Democrat candidate Republicans could hope for in 2016. The last thing conservatives want is to see her knocked out of the race early and give another Democrat like Martin O’Malley of Maryland a chance to get in the race.

So let’s give Hillary some slack. Let’s try to keep her off the conservative airwaves for a while.

To make room for more news that matters, I challenge the radio talk shows and Fox News to go Hillary-free for a week.

I don’t care if Hillary is caught on camera burning her email server in her fireplace tomorrow, or if she is abducted and held for ransom by space aliens tonight.

Please spare us the details, conservative media — at least until next week.

I’m tired of running into people at the supermarket who ask me, “What do you think about Hillary?”

For a week I don’t want to think or talk about Hillary. I want to talk about baseball. About Peter Rose being hired by Fox as an analyst. About country music. Anything but Hillary.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Hillary For America? Why?

Hillary’s all in for 2016.

Whoopee.

She officially arrived Sunday — but not in the flesh.

She announced her decision with a low-key tweet and a two-minute video featuring a diverse lineup of adorable Democrat voters, a sappy message about being “a champion of everyday Americans,” and very little face-time for herself.

Then, to prove she’s still a grassroots Chicago girl at heart, the multimillionaire from Chappaqua sneaked out of New York at 70 mph on one of the phoniest “road trips” of all time.

Chauffeured by Secret Service men in a three-van convoy bound for Iowa, she actually met a few regular “flyover people” at a gas station in Altoona; and she made a sneaky pit stop in Ohio at a Chipotle.

With her oversized shades and trusty aide Huma Abedin paying the bill, however, Hillary was spotted standing in line at the popular Mexican chain restaurant.

When the media swooped into the Chipotle a day later, they learned that Hillary and Huma had stiffed the kids behind the counter.

Caught not leaving a tip for the working class is not a good PR move for a wealthy everywoman who says she’ll fight for the struggling everyman.

As Rush Limbaugh pointed out, that little socioeconomic gaffe revealed how badly out of touch Hillary is with the people she’s counting on to vote her and Bill back into power.

Which raises the big question: “Why ‘Hillary for President’?”

She’s the Democrats’ default presidential nominee, the Entitled One; but she’s a lightweight on every scale.

Quick. What does Hillary stand for?

Has she ever had a deep thought or a good idea about policy — foreign or domestic?

What has she done in her public life so far to make this country a better place? What is her great vision for America?

And what are her great career accomplishments? Not many.

She was basically handed a U.S. Senate seat.

Big deal — a liberal Democrat carpetbagger wins in liberal New York. And then makes herself invisible for six years in the Senate.

As secretary of state, her highlight reel includes Benghazi and a string of failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, and China.

Her biggest achievement as secretary of state was racking up a record number of frequent flyer miles.

For her debut in Iowa this week, Hillary was dodging tough questions from reporters and carefully speaking in political generalities, platitudes, and soundbites.

She was trying so hard to put some daylight between herself and President Obama that she almost sounded like my dad.

She was promising to make the economy grow by cutting bad regulations, and she mentioned adding market-based reforms to what’s she thinks are the good parts of Obamacare.

Maybe Ms. Authentic 2016 was trying out her Maggie Thatcher impersonation. (Believe me, I knew Maggie Thatcher–and Hillary is no Maggie Thatcher.)

Unfortunately for the country, Hillary can’t escape being Hillary. And if she’s saying anything about the economy that makes sense, it’s pure accident.

Hillary can’t compare to Marco Rubio and Rand Paul, the first of a gang of young, smart, accomplished conservative Republican presidential candidates who are not stuck in the 1990s.

The announcement speeches by Rubio and Paul were great — full of vision and ideas about reform in Washington and calls for reasserting America’s prosperity at home and leadership abroad.

Meanwhile, Hillary’s really just running on a single issue — that she’s a woman and it’s time for America to have its first woman president.

Over the next 19 months I think millions of everyday voters are going to figure that out. Maybe the liberal media might too.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth