Here are my observations and opinions on my selected news of the day.

DEMOCRAT DISDAIN for anything proposed by President Trump came as no surprise after he outlined a more comprehensive approach to immigration – more than southern border remedies – the first in more than 50 years.

“We are proposing an immigration plan based on merit, that puts the jobs, wages and safety of American workers first,” said the president Thursday, “our proposal is pro-American, pro-immigrant and pro-worker. It’s just common sense.”

Before the applause in the Rose Garden had subsided, Democrats were signaling such a bill would be dead on arrival in the House. Wanting foreign students educated here to remain in the U.S. rather than return to their home country, and seeking high talent immigrants to come to the U.S. were key elements of his proposal.

But wouldn’t you know it, Speaker Nancy Pelosi saw “merit” as a condescending word, saying, “Are they saying family is without merit?”

FLASHBACK: In 2013, when Sen. Chuck Schumer passed the Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act, here’s what Pelosi said then: “The bill would reaffirm our values, advance our ideals, and honor our history as a nation of immigrants. The Senate moves our country one step closer to achieving common sense reform that reflects our heritage and makes American more American,” and urged House Democrats to vote for it.

That bill stated that it “establishes a merit-based and points immigrant admissions system” based on education, employment, and other characteristics, and grant visas to those with higher scores.

Surely, the Trump campaign will use her 2013 comments in 2020.

The arrogant Democrat Sen. Richard Blumenthal slammed the proposal as a “despicable abdication of moral authority,” suggesting that it would have kept his and the president’s immigrant father from entering the United States.

It’s a comment that you might expect from him. Someone needs to remind him that times have changed since the days of Ellis Island, when America opened its arms to people who could help build America.

Times of changed. America now needs to attract those with technological education and skills to vie for a “Build America Visa.”

The president intends to campaign on this issue and has said if Democrats don’t get on board, they will see it passed in 2021, “when we take back the House, retain the Senate, and of course, hold the presidency.”

CNN’S JIM ACOSTA joined other left-leaning “journalists” in picking-apart President Trump’s immigration plan, looking for something negative to report to his meager audience.

Jim Acosta writing @Acosta: “Trump in Rose Garden speech paints asylum seekers with broad brush accusing them of misleading immigration authorities at border: “These are frivolous claims.”

However, Breitbart News White House correspondent Charlie Sperling, in a reply to Acosta, shared the president’s full quote, which highlighted that “legitimate asylum seekers are being displaced by those lodging frivolous claims.” As you would expect, Acosta did not acknowledge.

AMY, AMY, AMY, you passed up an opportunity to prove that you really are a centrist during your ill-advised appearance on The View on Friday. Asked by Meghan McCain if she supported late-term abortion and Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s comments on infanticide, Democrat presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar blew it.

With the Marist Poll citing that three out of four Americans support restrictions on abortions after the first trimester, it seems to Kramerontheright that Klobuchar missed the opportunity to attract moderates and conservatives.

But she dodged the question, citing the tired comment that she is for women having the right to make a choice for their own bodies. What’s more, she denied having heard of Northam’s the well-publicized description of a late term abortion technique. That’s hard to believe. Perhaps if Klobuchar would watch other than CNN and MSNBC, she might have seen it.

Co-host Joy Behar came to side of Klobuchar, shouting down McCain, but not before McCain could say, “I don’t think it should be hard to say, ‘I’m not for late-term abortion.’”

DEMOCRATS ATTACK CHRISTIANITY – Two Democrats this week again revealed their party’s disdain for Christianity. When asked by Hugh Hewitt which form of Islamic extremism he thought posed the greatest overall threat, Democrat presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg responded with, “Well, you know, not unlike Christianity when it is motivating someone to do something extreme, it can have a thousand different flavors.”

Meanwhile, socialist Democrat Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez accused Republicans of “turning the United States into a far-right Christian theocracy” suggesting that the GOP is subverting and dismantling our democracy into “a creepy theological order led by a mad king.”

Oh, how it must outrage them when President Trump regularly refers to God in his speeches.

MORE EVIDENCE OF LEFTIST, ACTIVIST JOURNALISM appeared in Saturday’s Arizona Republic, not in its opinion section, but among the news. And, it was above the fold to get reader attention.

The Republic began waging an attack on Sen. Martha McSally even before she was selected to fill the vacancy of the late John McCain, with hit pieces by their columnists.

I’m sure the Republic would respond that it was indeed a news story, because it is about a Flagstaff resident who used an app to send a message to McSally inquiring about her pro-life stance. But it includes a tutorial of sorts that encourages readers to criticize McSally and her colleagues, supported by the ad-like headline, “App lets users turn up heat on McSally, GOP Congress.”

THANKS TO THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, a retraction by the Poynter Institute published on its website, will now be seen by millions in WSJ’s “Notable & Quotable column.

In my May 14, 2019 post, I told you about billionaire George Soros’ funding of the Poynter Institute, which blatantly refers to itself as “a school for journalism and democracy,” and their list blacklisting of conservative newspapers and websites they deemed “unreliable.”

In its retraction, Poynter claimed that its list of 515 “unreliable” news sites was compiled by journalists, fact-checkers and researchers across the country to provide a useful tool for readers to gauge the legitimacy of the information they were consuming.

Complaints led them to do an audit to “test the accuracy and veracity of the list,” and apologize for their failure “to ensure than the data was rigorous before publication.” Well, DUH!

                                May God bless the United States of America.