TRUMP AS PRESIDENT - I WILL NOT CRITICIZE (MEXICO DEAL)

TRUMP AS PRESIDENT - I WILL NOT CRITICIZE (MEXICO DEAL):

I WILL PRAY FOR PRES TRUMP BUT I WON’T PUBLICLY CRITICIZE HIM.

NO MAN IS PERFECT; ONLY GOD ALMIGHTY.

OUR IMMIGRATION SYSTEM WAS VERY BROKEN & CONGRESS REFUSED TO FIX IT.

HAVE WE BECOME SO POLITICALLY CORRECT, MEDIA DRIVEN AND DIVISIVE THAT WE NO LONGER CARE ABOUT WHAT IS LEGALLY & MORALLY CORRECT ACCORDING TO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW??

WHY CRITICIZE A LEADER WHO IS ONLY TRYING TO LEGALLY HELP BOTH AMERICAN CITIZENS & ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS EXPERIENCE THE AMERICAN DREAM?

GOD BLESS OUR NATION

GOD BLESS THE U.S. MILITARY

GOD BLESS MEXICO FOR AGREEING TO SIGN THIS DEAL.


Post Sources: CBS News, Fox News, Reuters, Washington Post


**** Trump’s big win leaves critics sputtering

Because President Trump emerges as a clear winner from his week-long confrontation with Mexico over our neighbor’s lax enforcement of its southern border, reflexive Trump critics will scramble to find some way of containing what is a clear Trump triumph, which came with assists by Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who conducted the key negotiations.

Already we have heard about long-term damage to trust between the North American allies, about investor nervousness and Trump’s unpredictability.

This sort of flailing-about to deny the obvious says nothing about Trump and much about those critics who can no more admit he played high-stakes poker and won a round on border security than they can admit that the president delivered a magnificent tribute to the heroes of Normandy on Thursday.

Much of the media has overheated now and, like an engine that has run too long without an oil change, has begun to seize up, stall, even melt.

That Trump has contributed to the slow wreck of American media is undeniable.

It’s a feature, not a bug, of his presidency to attack, attack, attack the media elites. And no matter how often center-right journalists counsel him to abandon the Stalinist “enemy of the people” rhetoric, he hasn’t because it triggers a flaming hatred among the ideologies of the left, with platforms and elites eager to signal each other that they are part of the tribe menaced by this Godzilla from Trump Tower.

Voters, though — not just the “Twitter Democrats” but voters of all ages and ideologies — are a pretty smart bunch. Assume for a moment that they know, generally, that tariffs are a lousy idea in terms of economic growth. Assume as well that they know that tariffs can be an instrument of national power in confrontations unrelated to economic growth.

Assume that voters know our competition with China is far more than an economic race, but rather a complex geopolitical rivalry that both sides wish to keep contained short of open conflict and that is waged through proxies, cyber-confrontations, intellectual-property battles, freedom-of-the-seas disputes and the relative size and power of our armed forces and those of our allies.

In that context, tariffs on Chinese goods are just part of an overall negotiation toward a new normal that is in everyone’s interest.

So “tariffs bad, free trade good” is simplistic. “Free trade is good and agreed-upon international conventions are required for genuinely free trade and tariffs may be necessary to achieve those conventions” is accurate. And widely understood.

“Alliances are good” is simplistic. “Alliances in which allies actually do what they promise with regard to percentage of GDP spent on national defense while not increasing dependence on Russian natural gas” is complex but accurate.

Hard as it is for the Manhattan-Beltway echo chamber to believe, sounding sophisticated isn’t actually being sophisticated. Trump’s record is mixed, but not this week.

This week, even as Joe Biden began to melt (the headline in Saturday’s Times of London online edition was “Democrats raise doubts over Joe Biden’s stamina for presidential nomination race” — never a good sign when the neighbors notice these things), Trump put together back-to-back big successes. Historian and classicist Victor Davis Hanson speculates that Trump’s enemies are so addicted to hating him that, in a classic addict pattern, all behaviors are bent in service of the addiction.

This weekend and next week will separate the outrage addicts from the serious journalists. Trump would be very well advised to take this tariff weapon off the table with regard to Mexico.

It probably wouldn’t work a second time unless the Mexicans failed to deliver even a halfhearted effort.

It’s not the sort of threat you can use twice, and doing so would undo the enormous win he can rightfully paint this to be at rally after rally as Campaign 2020 gets underway.

If Trump invited Democrats back to the White House for immigration reform and border security talks right now, urging them to be as serious as the Mexican government has been about the border crisis, it might actually work.

House Democrats passed an immigration bill last week. Senate Republicans could quickly pass their own version to get a joint House-Senate conference with White House participation.

Everyone could win: the United States and Mexico, the president and the House speaker, both parties, the undocumented in this country seeking regularization, and the desperate and easily exploited poor of Central America.

NEW IMMIGRATION TRAVEL BAN SAME AS 1st TRAVEL BAN (PROTECTS USA BORDERS)

NEW IMMIGRATION TRAVEL BAN SAME AS FIRST TRAVEL BAN (PROTECTS USA BORDERS):

TRUMP SAYS YES TO NATIONAL SECURITY, NO TO BEING POLITICALLY CORRECT.

TRUMP SAYS NO TO ISIL OPERATIVES POSING AS REFUGEES.

HIS PREDECESSORS ENFORCED SIMILAR
ANTI-TERRORISM TRAVEL BANS.


Sources: Fox News, NBC News, YouTube


***** Trump adviser says new travel ban will have 'same basic policy outcome'


Senior White House Policy Adviser Stephen Miller told Fox News' "First 100 Days" Tuesday that a revised version of President Donald Trump's travel ban would "have the same basic policy outcome."

Miller claimed that the new executive order would be "responsive" to federal court rulings which halted the original order and resolve "a lot of very technical issues that were brought up by the court."

However, Miller also insisted that the court ruling staying the original order was "flawed" and "erroneous" and that Trump's action was "clearly legal and constitutional."

"Here's the reality," Miller said. "We’ve got a serious problem in our country of terrorism, radicalization and serious problems of people joining ISIS, joining terror groups, joining Al Qaeda and committing or attempting to commit acts of crime and terror against our nation."

Miller indicated the revised order would apply to the same seven majority-Muslim countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan and Libya — as the previous order.

Miller spoke to host Martha MacCallum at the top of an hour-long immigration town hall in Jacksonville, Fla. hours after Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly directed agency heads to hire thousands more immigration officers, end so-called “catch-and-release” policies and begin work on the president’s promised U.S.-Mexico border wall.

Senior White House Policy Adviser Stephen Miller told Fox News' "First 100 Days" Tuesday that a revised version of President Donald Trump's travel ban would "have the same basic policy outcome.

Miller spoke to host Martha MacCallum at the top of an hour-long immigration town hall in Jacksonville, Fla. hours after Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly directed agency heads to hire thousands more immigration officers, end so-called “catch-and-release” policies and begin work on the president’s promised U.S.-Mexico border wall.

Through a show of hands, most of the town hall audience indicated that they supported Trump's tough stance on illegal immigration.

"I think [Miller's] main argument was right on point," said audience member Jack Capra. "Securing our borders is a national security issue [and] it's the federal government's job to keep our citizens safe from external and internal threats. I think immigration is a big contributor to that."

However, immigration attorney Francisco Hernandez told MacCallum that Trump's ordered immigration enforcement changes had "written a blank check that he can't cash."

"He’s going to have to get the money from somewhere," Hernandez said, "and we don’t have the money."

In last year's presidential election, a Fox News exit poll found that 10 percent of Florida voters said immigration was the biggest issue facing the country. Of those voters, 69 percent backed Trump over Hillary Clinton.

PAT MCCRORY RUINS POLITICAL CAREER; REPEALS LGBT BATHROOM ORDINANCE (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS)

PAT MCCRORY RUINS POLITICAL CAREER; REPEALS LGBT BATHROOM ORDINANCE 

IT'S NOT ABOUT PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION. IT'S REALLY ABOUT 2016 POLITICS.

GAY RIGHTS BULLIES & POLITICAL CORRECTNESS vs COMMON SENSE & PUBLIC SAFETY

Sources:  ABC News, Charlotte Observer, WSOC, Twitter, Youtube

Pat McCrory Tweeted:–Verified account‏@PatMcCroryNC

"Ordinance defied common sense, allowing men to use women’s bathroom/locker room for instance. That’s why I signed bipartisan bill to stop it."

7:16 PM - 23 Mar 2016

February 22, 2016 Charlotte City Council members rammed through an Aggressive Politically-Correct LGBT Bathroom Sharing ordinance without regard for public safety.

March 24, 2016 amid THREATS from Gay Rights Bullies with tons of MONEY, 

North Carolina Gov Pat McCrory repealed this Aggressive Politically-Correct LGBT Bathroom Sharing ordinance.

Now the OBAMA Administration and wealthy donors are ordering all mainstream media networks to ruin Gov McCrory's political career via negative propaganda just like Bullies do when they want to destroy someone's life.

Before I proceed with this post I want to make it clear that I have not always agreed with Gov McCrory's policies but in this instance I do.

Now let's analyze the theatrics behind all this Obama-inspired, Politically-Correct divisive drama.

So why did elected members of the Charlotte City Council recently pass an ordinance requiring all local businesses (including Churches) to allow Men, Women & Children to use bathrooms of their choice based on which Sexual or Gender they identify with on a day-to-day basis?

This ordinance was passed to repay Political favours.

You see during the last election (Nov 2015) wealthy donors and LGBT advocates poured tons of money into the campaign coffers of Charlotte's elected officials.

After winning their seats it was payback time.

Regardless of public safety concerns and the obvious lack of common sense, those wealthy donors and LGBT advocates forced Charlotte's elected officials into ramming through an Aggressive "Bathroom for everyone at the same time" ordinance.

You see the passage of such an aggressive ordinance was not about prohibiting Discrimination against LGBT people.

It was about repaying Political favors to wealthy political donors who don't really care about the U.S. Constitution, nor true Human Rights.

Instead it's about the 2016 election, enforcing new Politically-Correct government agendas and blackmailing Governors who don't want to comply.

Under this new ordinance, at any given time an Adult Man or Woman based on their Gender identity for that particular day, could enter a public bathroom and use the facilities alongside a little boy or girl.

To heck with public safety right?

How ironic is it that many wealthy donors who support Gay rights wouldn't think twice about voting "YES" to Abort a baby at nine months.

In addition these same wealthy donors who support Gay rights don't really give a darn about Civil Rights for BLACK people living in the United States.

I repeat.

The passage of such aggressive bathroom sharing ordinances is not about prohibiting Discrimination against LGBT people.

Instead it's about the 2016 election, enforcing new Politically-Correct government agendas and blackmailing Governors who don't want to comply.

Considering the totality of the circumstances, North Carolina Gov Pat McCrory was left with no choice other than to work with NC legislators on quickly  repealing Charlotte's Aggressive "Bathroom for everyone at the same time" ordinance.

Did Gov McCrory ruin his political career as the mainstream media predicts just because he dared to defy a few wealthy LGBT donors and the Obama Administration who think they have replaced the Lord GOD Almighty??

Stay tuned.

It's time to PRAY like never before for the United States of America.

****  MCCRORY SIGNS BILL OVERTURNING TRANSGENDER ORDINANCE

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory has signed legislation designed to rein in local governments passing their own anti-discrimination rules.

McCrory's office confirmed he signed the law late Wednesday night, hours after the legislature finalized the bill in a one-day work session.

Lawmakers returned to Raleigh because a Charlotte City Council ordinance was supposed to take effect April 1 that expanded protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity for treatment at hotels and restaurants.

Critics focused on the ability of transgender people to use the bathroom or locker rooms aligned with their gender identity. So did McCrory, Charlotte's mayor for 14 years.

The resulting legislation went further. Now cities, towns, and counties can't pass anti-discrimination rules beyond a new state standard. And public schools, public college campuses and government agencies must require bathrooms or locker rooms be designated for use only by people based on their biological sex.

McCrory's office released a statement Wednesday night, saying "the basic expectation of privacy in the most personal of settings, a restroom or locker room, for each gender was violated by government overreach and intrusion by the mayor and city council of Charlotte."

The governor also said the "radical breach of trust and security under the false argument of equal access not only impacts the citizens of Charlotte but people who come to Charlotte to work, visit or play. This new government regulation defies common sense and basic community norms by allowing, for example, a man to use a woman's bathroom, shower or locker room."

Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of North Carolina, and Equality North Carolina condemned McCrory's action, and announced after the bill became law that the organizations are exploring legal challenges to the law.

"Instead of solving any real problems, the law would create new ones and could lead to intolerable and unfair conditions for transgender students who are entitled, by federal law, to a safe and equitable education," said Tara Borello, a senior attorney with Lambda Legal.

Republican majorities in the state House and Senate easily passed House Bill 2, blocking Charlotte's bathroom ordinance.

But something very unusual happened in the Senate - frustrated Democrats refused to vote on the bill, and walked out.

Facing a half-empty Senate chamber, Republican Sen.Tom Apodaca suggested Republicans move on with the vote.

"Mr. President, I move that we do third reading electronically, I don't think they're going to show back up," he said from the Senate floor.

After the Democrats walked out and let their empty seats do the talking. Republicans passed the bill without them, 32-0.

"I cannot recall a time when that's happened. I think it's a serious breach of (the Democrats') obligation to the citizens that voted to elect them," said Senate Pro-Tempore Phil Berger.

Still, in news releases sent out after the passage of the bill, Governor McCrory and legislative leaders referred to the measure as "bipartisan" - pointing out it did get votes from some Democrats.

The contentious vote proved a fitting end to what's been a controversial government power struggle.

Republicans argued that Charlotte had no authority to approve a city ordinance allowing transgender people to use the restroom aligned to their gender identity, a move to protect transgender citizens who felt intimidated or bullied in public restrooms.

HB2 blocks the ordinance and bars any other local government from enacting a similar measure.

"It's a terrible day for North Carolina. It's a terrible day," said Serena Sebring, a member of Southerner on New Ground, a group who came to oppose the General Assembly's vote. "People are harmed, people are going to be continued to be harmed. I would say shame on this state, shame on our lawmakers."

Social conservative activist Tami Fitzgerald led the fight against Charlotte's ordinance, arguing it gave license to sexual predators to enter the ladies' room.

"We're very pleased with the outcome", Fitzgerald said following the Senate vote. "Really it was just common sense, not to allow men in the women's bathrooms".

Fitzgerald, executive director of the North Carolina Values Coalition, also released a statement, saying in part, that, "we applaud Governor Pat McCrory for showing North Carolinians what a true leader looks like by sticking to his word in taking immediate action and signing HB2 into law. This new law strengthens North Carolina's already thriving business climate by giving business owners the freedom they deserve to do business effectively."

The law deals a blow to an LGBT movement that has had success getting similar ordinances approved in more than 200 cities across the country.

The ACLU of North Carolina issued an angry statement after the bill passed, calling the bill the "most-extreme anti-LGBT bill in the nation."

In part, the ACLU wrote:

The Charlotte ordinance protected lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender residents from discrimination in public accommodations including restaurants, hotels, taxis and bathrooms. Among other protections, it allowed transgender men and transgender women to use the restroom that corresponds to their gender identity. HB2 ... removes the ability of any local government to protect people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity and requires all public facilities, including schools, to allow restroom access only on the basis of "biological sex." It also jeopardizes the more than $4.5 billion in federal funding that North Carolina receives for secondary and post-secondary schools under Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination, including discrimination against transgender students.
Republican leaders at the General Assembly scheduled a one-day session after enough lawmakers requested to reconvene. They were responding to worries from constituents and conservative activists about the provision in the state's largest city that's set to take effect April 1. Otherwise, they wouldn't have met again until late April.

Republican House Speaker Tim Moore has said intervening is necessary to protect the safety of women and children. There have been arguments that any man - perhaps a sex offender - could enter a woman's restroom or locker room simply by calling himself transgender.

"What we're doing is preserving a sense of privacy that people have long expected in private facilities and we are restoring and clarifying ... the existing authority and limits of authority of local government," said GOP Rep. Dan Bishop, who represents Charlotte, a bill sponsor.

NC Attorney General Roy Cooper, a Democrat, released a statement Wednesday after the House vote voicing his opposition to the passage of the bill.

"We're better than this. Discrimination is wrong, period," Cooper said, in part. "That North Carolina is making discrimination part of the law is shameful. It will not only cause real harm to families, but to our economy as well."

The NC GOP fired back at Cooper, who is running for governor, saying "today, lawmakers were forced to return to Raleigh to hold an emergency session of the General Assembly because Attorney General Roy Cooper refused to do his job and protect North Carolina families and children."

Representatives for gay-rights groups said overturning the ordinance is wrong and demonizing the community. They say blocking the ordinance will deny lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people essential protections needed to ensure they can get a hotel room, hail a taxi or dine at a restaurant without fear.

At least 225 cities and counties nationwide have passed similar anti-discrimination laws.

"Charlotte's law is not unusual, unique or radical," said Chris Sgro, executive director of Equality North Carolina. "A special session to deal with such an ordinance is radical, unique and unusual."

Leading up to last month's approval in Charlotte, city leaders heard from LGBT residents who say they've experienced harassment and discrimination trying to use public accommodations.

The ordinance "sends a message to everyone that we matter," Erica Lachowitz of Charlotte, who was born male but identifies as female, said last week. Otherwise, she added, "we are afraid half the time to walk in to a bathroom that matches our gender identity."

McCrory, a Republican, has been critical of the ordinance in Charlotte, where he was mayor for 14 years.

Legislation requiring transgender students to use bathrooms corresponding with their birth gender have failed recently in other states. South Dakota's legislature failed to override Gov. Dennis Daugaard's veto of such legislation. A similar Tennessee bill died Tuesday in a House committee.

PAT MCCRORY BOLDLY SIGNS NC BILL BARRING LGBT BATHROOM SHARING AMID POLITICAL THREATS

NC GOV PAT MCCRORY BOLDLY SIGNS BILL BARRING LGBT BATHROOM SHARING AMID POLITICAL THREATS:

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF PUTTING POLITICAL CORRECTNESS BEFORE COMMON SENSE.

HOW CAN MEN, WOMEN & CHILDREN ALL SAFELY USE THE SAME BATHROOMS TOGETHER??

IT'S NOT ABOUT DISCRIMINATION, INSTEAD IT'S ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND AVOIDING LAWSUITS.

Sources: WRAL, Charlotte Observer, WNCT-TV, Youtube

*** McCrory signs bill barring LGBT protections against discrimination

A proposal that codifies a statewide nondiscrimination policy in employment and public accommodations and prohibits North Carolina cities or towns from enacting stricter guidelines was signed into law by Gov. Pat McCrory late Wednesday after clearing the General Assembly in less than nine hours.

"I have signed legislation passed by a bipartisan majority to stop this breach of basic privacy and etiquette which was to go into effect April 1," McCrory said in a statement. "Although other items included in this bill should have waited until regular session, this bill does not change existing rights under state or federal law.

"It is now time for the city of Charlotte elected officials and state elected officials to get back to working on the issues most important to our citizens."

All Democratic members of the Senate walked out of the chamber in protest Wednesday evening, leading to a 32-0 vote for the Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act.

"This bill essentially ties a noose around the necks of the cities and counties, and it smothers their ability to govern in a way that their citizens think they ought to," Senate Minority Leader Dan Blue said as other Democrats left. "We're not participating in this effort that you make to roll back the clock in this state, to take away powers from local governments."

Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger criticized the walkout. "Running out and ducking this vote is a serious breach of their duty to their constituents," he said.

On Wednesday afternoon, the House voted 84-24 in favor of the bill as state lawmakers rushed to push it through the General Assembly in a one-day special session.

"This is historic," said Rep. Dan Bishop, R-Mecklenburg, noting that North Carolina has never had a nondiscrimination statute.

The bill excludes gays and lesbians from discrimination protections, however, prompting an outcry from LGBT advocates, some corporations and Attorney General Roy Cooper, the Democratic candidate for governor.

Chris Sgro, executive director of Equality North Carolina, called it the "worst anti-LGBT bill in the entire nation."

"The bill tears away at the fabric of my community by overturning and pre-empting vital protections for gay and transgendered people," Sgro said. "He [McCrory] goes back on his word again by signing legislation coming out of an expensive and unnecessary special session."

"That the North Carolina legislature would convene a costly special session specifically to invalidate and prohibit the expansion of civil rights for LGBT people is disgraceful," Eric Wachter, associate regional director of the Anti-Defamation League, said in a statement. "Equality, fairness and the desire to stand on the right side of history are reasons enough for legislators to reject this odious and discriminatory legislation."

"Discrimination is wrong, period. That North Carolina is putting discrimination into the law is shameful," Cooper said in a YouTube video posted by his campaign.

"Our commitment to the fair treatment of all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, has not changed and is at the core of our NCAA values," NCAA spokeswoman Gail Dent said. "It is our expectation that all people will be welcomed and treated with respect in cities that host our NCAA championships and events."

Greensboro and Charlotte are scheduled to host regional games in the NCAA men's basketball tournament in the next two years.

A similar religious rights measure is pending in Georgia, where corporations and even the NFL have said they'll avoid doing business in the state if it becomes law.

The North Carolina bill also doesn't include disabled people among the groups protected from discrimination, but Bishop said other state statutes already protect them.

Rep. Grier Martin, D-Wake, tried to amend the bill so it included gays and lesbians among the protected groups, as well as veterans, but the Republican majority voted to table that suggestion.

The Senate Judiciary II Committee likewise tabled an attempt Wednesday evening by Sen. Terry Van Duyn, D-Buncombe, to add gender identity to the bill for protections against discrimination.

Bathroom debate prompted bill

The legislation is in response to an ordinance passed last month by the Charlotte City Council that broadly defines how businesses treat LGBT customers. The ordinance includes a provision that allows transgender people to use public bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity.

Social conservatives have railed against the Charlotte ordinance for weeks, saying it violates the religious freedom of business owners and puts women and children at risk by allowing sexual predators to go into women's bathrooms.

"If God didn't give you access to a male or female bathroom via your anatomy, neither should we give you access via either ordinance or legislation," John Amanchukwu, executive director of Upper Room Christian Academy in Raleigh, told members of the House Judiciary IV Committee on Wednesday morning.

Chloe Jefferson, a junior at Greenville Christian Academy, called the prospect of a boy in the girl's bathroom or locker room at her school "completely frightening," adding that dealing with body image is hard enough for teen girls without having boys around when they change clothes or go to the bathroom.

"I am not the only girl scared," Jefferson said.

Charlotte business owner Heather Garofalo encouraged lawmakers to outlaw local anti-discrimination ordinances, saying they threaten her religious right to choose not to serve LGBT customers.

"Business owners like myself, we would be forced to check our deepest-held beliefs at the door or suffer fines of $500, jail time, lawsuits," Garofalo said. "I am asking for a right to provide for my family."

But several transgender people pleaded with lawmakers to defeat the proposal, saying they are just as scared to go into bathrooms where they don't feel comfortable.

"I can't use the men's room. I won't go back to the men's room. It is unsafe for me there. People like me die there," said Madeleine Goss, a Raleigh woman who said she was bullied as a boy in Hickory because of her gender identity.

"I have the right to be safe too," a sobbing Angela Bridgeman told lawmakers.

"I feel bullied by you guys," Skye Thomson, a 15-year-old transgender boy from Greenville, told senators. "Imagine yourself in my shoes, being a boy walking into a ladies room. It's awkward and embarrassing and can actually be dangerous."

"Are you really interested in me being spit on and pushed around and shoved because of who I am in a restroom?" asked Rev. Michael Slack, a transgender man. "Legislating mistreatment, hatred and misunderstanding is shameful."

The bill would require people to use the bathroom that aligns with the gender listed on their birth certificate. Backers noted that North Carolina law allows people who have undergone a sex change to amend the gender on their birth certificates. California and Texas also allow people to amend their birth certificates, but it was unclear Wednesday whether other states had similar regulations.

"This is really not about bathrooms. It's about fear," said Rep. Rodney Moore, D-Mecklenburg. "The spirit of the bill is not what it says it intends to do."

Rep. Tricia Cotham, D-Mecklenburg, said the bill resorts to fear-mongering and "flies in the face of" attempts to move North Carolina forward.

"We must be a state that is inclusive and welcomes in North Carolina and protects everyone," Cotham said. "You are absolutely not protecting children, and you're not protecting women."

But Rep. Dean Arp, R-Union, said "prisoners have more privacy" than people in public bathrooms under the Charlotte ordinance.

"How compassionate is it to strip North Carolina citizens of their right to privacy?" Arp said.

Cotham was able to amend the bill to allow parents or caregivers to take children under age 7 into a public bathroom with them, regardless of gender.

Lawmakers draw line on municipal power

In addition to voiding the bathroom provision of Charlotte's ordinance and spelling out state policy on discrimination in employment and public accommodations, the bill also would prohibit cities and counties from adopting so-called living wage ordinances because that would require businesses to pay workers more than the state-established minimum wage.

Bishop and other supporters said North Carolina needs consistent regulations for business and that Charlotte overstepped its authority by passing its ordinance.

"This is not new law," Bishop said. "It's a clarification."

His characterization of the Charlotte City Council as "a handful of radicals under the influence of an activist group" and the ordinance as "the picture of the subversion of the rule of law" drew sharp rebukes from House Democrats.

"Government is best when handled at the lowest level possible," said Rep. Marvin Lucas, D-Cumberland, who called the bill "micromanaging."

"Even the authority you have given them in the past, you have taken away from them," said Rep. Mickey Michaux, D-Durham, noting the General Assembly has stripped cities of power several times in recent years.

Reps. Mike Hager, R-Rutherford, and Nelson Dollar said the legislature needs to act when Charlotte or another jurisdiction oversteps its authority.

"These cities and counties, especially in this case, have operated outside their boundaries, and they're into the boundaries of the state," Hager said.

"We do not need any municipal government acting outside of its appropriate authority, particularly when they are seeking to make political statements," Dollar said.

Other issues raised

Opponents to the bill also argued that not prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity could put $4 billion in federal education funding to the state at risk under the Title IX gender equity law.

Similar legislation has been defeated in Tennessee and South Dakota because of such concerns, but Republicans in the General Assembly argued Title IX has exemptions that would preclude any loss of funds to North Carolina.

Democrats also questioned whether the bill would eliminate some protections for wrongful termination claims by fired workers. Republicans disagreed on whether that was the case, with some saying it didn't and others saying people were better off filing a federal lawsuit anyway.

"A rushed process leads to mistakes, leads to omissions," Martin cautioned his fellow House members.

Under the bill, discrimination complaints would be handled by the state Human Relations Commission, but some Democrats pointed out that Republicans gutted the commission's budget last summer, which would render it ineffective.

Legislation becomes campaign issue

Lawmakers called themselves into session on Tuesday after McCrory declined to do so. McCrory said he thought the issue could be addressed during the regular 2016 legislative session, which starts April 25, but legislative leaders wanted to pre-empt the Charlotte ordinance, which is scheduled to take effect April 1.

Cooper said McCrory sparked the debate by publicly denouncing the ordinance shortly after it passed.

"Gov. McCrory got us started down this path by promising legislative action for political gain," he said. "The governor lit the match and then stood aside as the fire grew out of control."

McCrory's campaign responded by accusing Cooper of not doing his job in fighting the ordinance himself.

"Roy Cooper supports forcing women and young girls to use the same restrooms and locker rooms as grown men, all in the name of political correctness, and he refused to act as attorney general to protect our privacy and defend our state's laws," Russell Peck, McCrory's campaign manager, said in a statement.

Berger and Sen. Buck Newton, R-Wilson, the Republican candidate for attorney general, also criticized Cooper for his inaction on the Charlotte ordinance, which Newton called "a radical and dangerous policy."

"Frankly, if the attorney general would do his job, we wouldn't be here today," Newton said. "It would be easy for him to put a stop to this."

The Attorney General's Office has said no action is necessary because cases of indecent exposure and sexual assault can already be prosecuted under state law.

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS STRENGTHENS ISIL (EXPOSING RADICAL ISLAM)

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS STRENGTHENS ISIL, EXPOSING RADICAL ISLAM

WHY ARE CNN & NBC MEDIA NETWORKS AFRAID TO SAY "RADICAL ISLAM" ON AIR?

REFUSING TO IDENTIFY RADICAL ISLAM HARMS PEACEFUL, DEDICATED MUSLIMS.

Sources: Forbes, ABC News, YouTube

According to Webster's dictionary the term "Political Correctness" is defined as agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people.

From 2008 to 2016, under the OBAMA Administration it is a crime to mention the words "Radical Islam" when talking about Terrorist acts at the hands of Radicalized Muslims such as members of ISIL.

The ideology of Radical Islam is not based on the Islamic faith, instead it is a Political concept used to intimidate and control for the purpose of Money and Power.

Most REAL Muslims frequently condemn the evil, brutal acts of ISIL, however Pres OBAMA's Administration forbids mainstream media networks from saying the words "Radical Islam" while on air.

Thus operatives of ISIL have become stronger in their efforts to control Western nations and in attempting to achieve world domination.

**** Someone Tell The President We Can't Fight Radical Islam By Being Politically Correct

“This is an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share,” 

– President Obama hours after the terrorist attacks in Paris began unfolding.

The full statement by the president at first sounds lofty, courageous and dedicated to U.S. resolve in fighting the scourge that afflicted the City of Lights.A closer analysis, however, reveals that it is empty hypocritical posturing designed to deceive the American public and feed his politically correct allies in the media their narrative.

First, it was not an attack on “all of humanity and the universal values we share,” as Obama claimed. It was an attack by Islamists who do not share “our universal values” on its infidel enemies.

Second, wouldn’t it have been appropriate for him to have issued a similar type of unequivocal condemnation of terrorism and his strong affiliation with Israel’s commitment to fight against extremism when it began experiencing its most recent wave of massive attacks? 

After all, just as he expressed the close alliance between the U.S. and France in vowing to attack the terrorists who struck, the President also reiterated the “extraordinary bond between the United States and Israel” during last week’s meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and pledged to protect Israeli security.

Really?

Let’s roll the tape. When Palestinian terrorists began shooting and killing Israelis in every corner of their country, the Obama administration outrageously issued a contrived, evenhanded statement calling on both Israel and the Palestinians to reduce the violence. 

Perhaps—to be consistent with his so-called unequivocal views against terrorism expressed on Friday—he should have called on both France and ISIS to mutually reduce the violence.

The Obama administration’s role in the rise of ISIS

Third, Obama promised to “do whatever it takes to work with the French people and with nations around the world to bring these terrorists to justice, and to go after any terrorist networks that go after our people.” 

This is the same president who impeded the lawsuits against those who killed the 241 Marines in Beirut and won’t allow prosecutions of the Iranian Al Quds Force responsible for killing thousands of American soldiers in Iran and Iraq. 

He also refused to support FBI efforts to prosecute Hamas for killing scores of Americans, tried to interfere with civil law suits against the Palestinian Authority for murdering U.S. citizens and even prevented the victims of Iranian terrorism from collecting the billions of dollars of judgments awarded to them in dozens of lawsuits that Iran has lost.

Jurists on both political sides have agreed that the president has violated U.S. anti-terrorism laws that mandate the prosecution of those who kill “our people.”

Fourth, this is a president who some claim is more responsible for the rise of ISIS than anyone else in the world. 

Recently declassified emails demonstrate that his administration sold the initial shipment of major weapons to ISIS in 2012 as a counterweight to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. 

It’s quite ironic that Obama acts so sympathetically to the victims of ISIS attacks, much similar to how the man who murdered his parents pleads for mercy because he is an orphan.

Finally, expect the President and other Western leaders such as CIA Chief John Brennan to begin their apologia tour in claiming that the attackers had nothing to do with Islam, with a compliant media parroting their talking points. 

They will say that ISIS is not religious but a “death cult;” that “jihad” really means “peace” and those who carry out these attacks are “subverting a religion of peace.” 

The president has prohibited the term “Islamic terrorism” from the White House lexicon. Perhaps we should ban the terms “white racists,” the “Italian Mafia,” the “Hispanic drug cartels” and “black gangs.”

Even on Saturday, the Democratic presidential candidates refused multiple times to condemn “radical Islam,” falsely contending—as the many Muslim advocacy groups say today—that condemning radical Islam is racist. 

Also expect the mindless talking heads to claim that the majority of attempted terrorist attacks have been singularly stopped by the active cooperation of the American Muslim population.

Islamic terrorism has everything do with Islam

Let’s set the record straight once and for all: Islamic terrorism has everything do with Islam.

 The violent tactics of ISIS, al-Qaida, Hamas and every other Islamic terrorist group invokes their legitimacy by practicing the religion its purest form. 

This does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists or that Islam in inherently violent. 

There are vast numbers of peaceful Muslims. But Islam is defined by those who practice it. 

The decapitations by ISIS proscribed by the Koran were the dominant form of punishment by Mohammed’s armies against enemies who would not convert or accept Islamic supremacy.

The notion that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam is the invention of the leftist Western alliance with anti-civil rights Islamic advocacy groups. 

It is designed to mislead the public, especially because of the massive amount of terror the world has experience or observed since 9/11. ISIS is not subverting Islam, but it is derived from its basic tenants. 

It practices Islam the same way the Iranian Mullahs practice Islam, the way Saudi Arabia chops off limbs, the way Pakistan sentences to death anyone who converts to Christianity, the way that women are treated as second class citizens in traditional Muslim societies and the way that homosexuals are put to death.

Are we to think that the pro-violent and misogynist Muslim Brotherhood—which dominates the religious and social institutions of the Muslim world in both the East and West, and all of its offspring including al-Qaida, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Jama’at Islamiya, Boku Haram, Tabligi Jamat and others—have nothing to do with Islam?

Also, sorry to break the politically correct bubble, but it has been FBI intelligence that has stopped the vast majority of the more than 100 attempted Islamic terrorist attacks in the U.S. since 9/11, not the cooperation of the Muslim population with law enforcement. 

The sad reality is that radical Islamist front groups that masquerade as moderate—such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Muslim American Society (MAS)—discourage Muslims from cooperating with authorities.

Censoring the discussion

Indeed, these groups, who have been welcomed into the White House hundreds of times, exhort their members and all Muslims in the U.S. not to trust or talk to the FBI. 

Most significantly, they espouse an incendiary conspiratorial narrative that lies at the motivational root of all Islamic terrorism: 

They claim there is a war against Islam by the United States, Israel and the West. 

The terrorists who hear this narrative are then persuaded to avenge the “crimes” of the U.S., France or Israel by carrying out “jihad” that they justify as “defensive.”

It is only a matter of time before the high priesthood of self-anointed civil rights groups begin to reclaim their dominance in censoring the discussion—abetted by the useful idiots in the mainstream media—of mentioning the term “radical Islam” by claiming it’s a slur against all Muslims. 

Already, the media are dutifully reporting the “condemnations” of the Paris attacks by groups like CAIR and MPAC, the very same groups that say that any mention of radical Islam is Islamaphobic racism. 

If so, how would they categorize the gruesome Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris?

Obama’s hollow words on the Paris attacks will fade in the coming days largely because they never meant anything in the first place. 

But the American and European publics are not stupid. They understand the problem.

 It is our leaders who are disenfranchising us. 

And they think they will get away with it. Remember that they blamed the Benghazi massacre on an Internet video. 

Perhaps they will blame the ISIS attacks on a TV show.