On Monday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Caitlyn Jenner said, “I’m not a one-issue voter.” But that there is a lot of pressure to be a single-issue voter, and “A lot in our community are…were very upset that I, you know, I was a Republican, and I said at the Republican National Convention, I said it was harder to come out as trans than it was to come out a member of the Republican Party.” Jenner said, “They were fine in Malibu with it [Jenner’s support for Trump], but let’s put it this way, I never actually came out and outwardly supported Trump. The media did that for me. I am on the Republican, conservative side, and he wound up being our candidate. And so, certainly, I was going to vote for him. He looked like he would pretty good on all LGBT issues. Which is important, because my loyalties do not lie with Donald Trump. My loyalties do not lie with the Republican Party. My loyalties, and what I’m fighting for is my community, the LGBT community, and particularly the trans issues that are out there, because there are many of them. And so, that’s where my
On the Tuesday edition of Breitbart News Daily, broadcast live on SiriusXM Patriot Channel 125 from 6AM to 9AM Eastern, Breitbart editor-in-chief Alex Marlow will continue our discussion of the first 100 days of the Trump administration. He’ll be joined by the renowned conservative writer and historian Patrick J. Buchanan. Buchanan, who was the subject of a recent Politico profile, will weigh in on Trump’s first 100 days. As the opening paragraph of Politico’s article details, Buchanan is nothing short of a living legend whose keen insights into the populist nationalist movement predate Trump’s political ascendancy by decades: His first date with his future wife was spent in a New Hampshire motel room drinking Wild Turkey into the wee hours with Hunter S. Thompson. He stood several feet away from Martin Luther King Jr. during the “I Have a Dream” speech. He went to China with Richard M. Nixon and walked away from Watergate unscathed. He survived Iran-Contra, too, and sat alongside Ronald Reagan at the Reykjavík Summit. He invaded America’s living rooms and pioneered the rhetorical combat that would power the cable news age. He defied the establishment by challenging a sitting president of his own party. He captured the fear and frustration of
President Trump has conferred to Asian leaders over the matter of North Korea’s missile tests and the threats of a nuclear strike. Many conversations have been filling the phone wires that put President Xi of China in charge of handling Kim Jung Un. Okay, but can or will China do all that is necessary and […]
The post China is Charged With Control of North Korea, Bad Idea? appeared first on The DENISE SIMON EXPERIENCE Blog.
The Iranian regime’s nuclear weapons program, born in secrecy and kept hidden for years, has never skipped a beat and today continues on course in underground and military facilities to which inspectors have no access. On 21 April 2017, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), the oldest, largest, and best organized democratic Iranian opposition group presented startling new evidence that the jihadist regime in Tehran is violating the terms of the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) agreement reached in July 2015 among the P-5 +1 (Permanent Five Members of the UN Security Council plus Germany), the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), and Iran.
As will be recalled, it was the NCRI that first blew the lid off Iran’s clandestine nuclear weapons program in 2002, at a time when it had been in progress for at least fourteen years (since 1988), unbeknownst to most of the world, including the IAEA. Virtually all of the Iranian nuclear sites now known publicly were only retroactively ‘declared’ by the mullahs’ regime after exposure: the Natanz enrichment site, Isfahan conversion site, Fordow enrichment and Research and Development (R&D) site, Lavizan-Shian, and more. Regularly corroborated additional revelations since 2002 by the NCRI have built a record of credibility that should prompt a closer official look at these new reports by the U.S. State and Defense Departments, National Security Council (NSC), and White House.
Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of NCRI’s Washington office, provided a devastating expose of the ongoing activities of the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research (SPND), the Tehran-based element of the Iranian Ministry of Defense that has primary responsibility for the regime’s nuclear weapons development. The SPND, established in February 2011, was officially sanctioned by the U.S. Department of State in August 2014 for engaging in nuclear weapons R&D. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (aka Dr. Hassan Mohseni), the founder and director of the SPND and a veteran IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps) brigadier general, was designated individually under UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1747 in 2007 and by the U.S. in July 2008 for his involvement in Iran’s proscribed WMD activities. Despite these designations, and the IAEA’s failure to resolve the many critical indicators of “Possible Military Dimensions” related to Iran’s nuclear program as specified in the November 2011 IAEA Board of Governors report, the July 2015 JCPOA inexplicably lifted sanctions against the SPND.
It is hardly surprising, then, to learn that the SPND not only continues critical weaponization research involving nuclear warheads, triggers, and explosives, but has expanded that work at each of seven subordinate locations. One of these, revealed by the NCRI in 2009 but never declared to the IAEA, is the Center for Research and Expansion of Technologies on Explosions and Impact (Markaz-e Tahghighat va Tose’e Fanavari-e Enfejar va Zarbeh or METFAZ), which works on triggers and high-impact, non-conventional explosives. The current METFAZ director is a Ministry of Defense engineer named Mohammad Ferdowsi, whose expertise is in high explosives. Ferdowsi also serves as chairman of the board of directors of the High-Explosive Society of Malek Ashtar University (affiliated with the Defense Ministry).
After conclusion of the July 2015 JCPOA, much of METFAZ’s personnel and work was moved to the Parchin military facility for better cover and security. Parchin Chemical Industries, an element of Iran’s Defense Industries Organization (DIO), was sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury in 2008 for importing “a chemical precursor for solid propellant oxidizer, possibly to be used for ballistic missiles.” Parchin is the location where the IAEA long suspected Iran was conducting test explosions for nuclear detonators. In October 2014, Iran finally admitted to using Parchin to test exploding bridge wires, but implausibly claimed they were not for weapons development. Equally incredibly, the IAEA concluded a secret side deal with Iran that allowed it to collect its own samples at Parchin—in which the IAEA in fact did find evidence of enriched uranium. But despite that and more evidence, the JCPOA was concluded and sanctions against Parchin Chemical Industries were lifted.
Within Parchin are twelve separate military and missile complexes. According to the NCRI’s new information, METFAZ has established a new location within one of these that is near the center of Parchin and referred to simply as the “Research Academy” in SPND internal communications. Located on the sprawling Parchin complex some 30 miles southeast of Tehran, the new METFAZ center is called the Chemical Plan of Zeinoddin and is located in a section called Plan 6. It’s completely fenced in and protected by heavy security under control of the IRGC’s Intelligence Service. What goes on there is concealed from the IAEA, and likely with good reason.
Old and New Locations for the SPND
METFAZ’s Research Academy Location within Parchin Plan 6 Area
Lambasting the Iranian regime for its ongoing regional aggression and support to terrorist organizations, as Secretary of State Tillerson did on 20 April 2017, is certainly a step in the right direction. Noting that after ten years, Iran can break out and build all the bombs it wants is also a useful observation. But neither of those comes close to fulfilling the Trump campaign pledge to “rip up” the JCPOA – or hold Iran accountable for its violations of the JCPOA. Secretary Tillerson’s 18 April letter to U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, certifying that Iran was in compliance with the 2015 deal, simply cannot be squared with the NCRI’s latest revelations, which it has shared with both the U.S. government and the IAEA. Indeed, the independent Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) issued a March 3, 2017 report in which it explicitly states about the IAEA’s 24 February 2017 Quarterly report, “Nowhere in the report does the IAEA state that Iran is fully compliant with the JCPOA, and it should not make that judgement.”
The real problem with the JCPOA—and why it needs to be ripped to shreds—is not what’s in it: it’s what’s been left out or exempted in any number of secret side deals that the U.S. and IAEA concluded with the Iranians. Among critical issues either explicitly permitted or simply not covered in the JCPOA are the following:
- Iran keeps its entire nuclear infrastructure intact
- Iran keeps all its centrifuges and is allowed to work on newer models
- Iran can deny IAEA inspectors access to any site it seeks to keep off-limits
- Iran can continue its ballistic missile nuclear weapons delivery system research, development, and testing
- Iran’s nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and ballistic missile collaboration with North Korea is not mentioned in the JCPOA
- Iran’s ongoing support for terrorism is off-limits for the JCPOA
The Trump administration must make good on its campaign promises with regard to Iran, its nuclear weapons program, and the JCPOA. The U.S. with its international partners and the IAEA must demand that Iran fully implement all UN Security Council Resolutions (including the one prohibiting Iran from any nuclear enrichment activities); accept the Additional Protocol; and allow unhindered access for IAEA inspectors to all suspected centers and facilities.
Beginning to fill relevant USG positions with officers untainted by association with the failed JCPOA or Iran Lobby affiliates like NIAC (National Iranian American Council) is an imperative and urgent first step. Announcing U.S. intent to end all activities associated with the JCPOA, hold Iran to account for its human rights abuses, involvement in the 9/11 attacks, and continuing support for terrorism would be natural subsequent policy positions.
We look forward to the results of the JCPOA policy review that Secretary Tillerson has announced.
With Mark Krikorian, Michael Cutler, Gordon Chang and Michael Rowan
MARK KRIKORIAN, Executive of the Center for Immigration Studies, Contributor at National Review:
- Possible government shut down over border security
- President Trump’s seeming reversal on the “dreamers”
MICHAEL CUTLER, Retired Senior Special agent of the former Immigration and Naturalization Services, Senior Fellow at Californians for Population Stabilization:
- Democrats’ flip flop on a border wall
- Republican leadership weakness on border security
- Why every state is a border state
GORDON CHANG, Author of The Coming Collapse of China and Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes on the World:
- Continued threats from Pyongyang to the United States
- American citizen detained by the North Koreans
- Iran’s continued development of nuclear weapons
MICHAEL ROWAN, Columnist at El Universal and Veneeconomia:
- Demonstrations in Venezuela
- What is next for the Maduro regime
- How the Venezuelan army will respond to the unrest
Center Executive Vice President Jim Hanson joined Fox and Friends to grade President Trump’s first 100 days regarding security policy:
Washington, D.C., April 24, 2017 – Ten years ago, Chiquita Brands International became the first U.S.-based corporation convicted of violating a U.S. law against funding an international terrorist group—the paramilitary United Self-defense Forces of Colombia (AUC). But punishment for the crime was reserved only for the corporate entity, while the names of the individual company […]
The post New Chiquita Papers, Bankrolled Terror in Columbia appeared first on The DENISE SIMON EXPERIENCE Blog.
Tillerson called for a full review of the Iran nuclear deal and rightly so. Then the mission was to examine the years of proven history of Iran’s terror operations including making weapons that were used to kill and permanently injure U.S. military forces, something Senator Tom Cotton challenged General Dempsey on last year in a […]
The post Tillerson is Telling us that Obama Gave Away Leverage on Iran appeared first on The DENISE SIMON EXPERIENCE Blog.
After the Democrats’ drubbing in the 2016 election, one would have thought they would be reluctant to oppose Donald Trump on his signature issue of securing America’s southern border.
The public wants it done, and made Mr. Trump president to do that.
In addition, congressional Democrats had previously voted to build the wall.
But now, Democratic legislators are saying they’ll shut down the government, rather than approve funding for this purpose. Perhaps that’s in part because they know the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill doesn’t want to see Mr. Trump’s promise fulfilled, either.
I say, bring it on. Republicans who help Democrats undermine our national security should be primary-ed. And Democrats beholden to government labor unions must be put on notice that federal employees identified as “non-essential” in case of governmental shut-down will be the first fired when budget cuts have to be made.
With Kurt Schlichter and Bill Gertz
JIM HANSON, Executive Vice President of the Center for Security Policy:
- Paris shooting
KURT SCHLICHTER, Senior columnist at TownHall.com,
- How the recent attack in Paris might effect on the upcoming Presidential election in France
- The demise of free speech in America
- Berkley riots
BILL GERTZ, Senior Editor at the Washington Free Beacon:
- Did America use cyber warfare to sabotage North Korea’s missile?
- North Korea’s submarine missile program
From Trevor Loudon's News Feed:
By: Roger Aronoff | Accuracy in Media
Recent comments by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warning that Iran could follow North Korea’s path of nuclear belligerence, and the Trump administration’s certification, in turn, that Iran is complying with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), seem to send mixed messages. However, any guarantee of Iran’s compliance must grapple with the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors can only inspect declared, and not military or undeclared, nuclear development sites.
“An unchecked Iran has the potential to follow the same path as North Korea and take the world along with it,” said Tillerson at the State Department. “The United States is keen to avoid a second piece of evidence that strategic patience is a failed approach.”
In other words—as we have often argued—the path of “patience,” or waiting, toward Iran means that this totalitarian regime is virtually guaranteed to eventually develop nuclear weapons. The unsigned Iran deal actually legitimizes Iran’s nuclear aspirations by condoning its enrichment of uranium.
The Iranian regime has also been emboldened by this unsigned deal because it supposedly binds the hands of both Congress and President Donald Trump. On April 20, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad-Zarif, tweeted that “Worn-out US accusations can’t mask its admission of Iran’s compliance w/ JCPOA, obligating US to change course & fulfill its own commitments.”
On the campaign trail Donald Trump described the Iran Deal as “the worst deal ever negotiated” and threatened to rip it up. Trump’s actions certifying Iran’s compliance appear to be a marked departure from his earlier campaign promises. But in reality it amounts to a 90-day extension of sanctions relief, part of a review process that was one of few concessions to Congress having a role. Trump said at his press conference with the Italian prime minister on April 20 that Iran has “not lived up to the spirit of the agreement. They have to do that. They have to do that.” Trump said that “they are doing a tremendous disservice to an agreement that was signed. It was a terrible agreement. It shouldn’t have been signed.”
First of all, President Trump, no, it wasn’t signed. It was never signed. And here is the proof. It is a letter from then-Secretary of State John Kerry’s State Department to then-Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS), who at the time was on the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and is now the CIA director.
Pompeo responded to the State Department letter by posting a press release on his congressional website stating that the “unsigned” deal was “nothing more than a press release and just about as enforceable.” He added that “For the State Department to try to defend the unsigned and nonbinding Iran nuclear agreement by calling it a ‘political commitment’ is about as absurd as the terms of the deal itself.” So why is the Trump administration participating in this sham agreement?
As the Times of Israel reports, “he [Trump] is looking for another way to ratchet up pressure on Tehran.” It looks like Trump wants to take a closer look before deciding how to proceed, and this certification that Iran is in compliance was more of a strategic pause than a seal of approval that Iran is living up to its end of the deal. According to the Times of Israel, “Tillerson said the administration has undertaken a full review of the agreement to evaluate whether continued sanctions relief is in the national interest. Tillerson noted that Iran remains a leading state sponsor of terrorism and that President Donald Trump had ordered the review with that in mind.”
What Trump should do is rip up the deal and end sanctions relief toward Iran. New, harsher sanctions should be imposed on this totalitarian dictatorship. At the end of the day, the only real solution to the Iranian problem is regime change.
Yet The Washington Post claims, “If the administration were to decide to walk away or otherwise renege on its commitments, it would open the door for Iran to cast aside its own promises and resume the unfettered development of its nuclear program.” What commitments are these? Refusing to impose more sanctions on Iran despite its sponsorship of terror and human rights abuses?
In fact, the Post reports that the Republican-led Congress is working on extending a number of sanctions, but they have delayed the legislation in order to limit the effect on Iran’s presidential election, “which is scheduled for next month.” Iran shouldn’t just be punished for pursuing nuclear weapons, it should also be punished for its state sponsorship of terror.
While former President Barack Obama also acknowledged that Iran is indeed a state sponsor of terrorism, it is one of only three nations that still remain on the State Department list. Obama said “It helps prop up the Assad regime in Syria. It supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. It aids the Houthi rebels in Yemen. So countries in the region are right to be deeply concerned about Iran’s activities, especially its support for violent proxies inside the borders of other nations.” When Obama said it, the media used it to show that he wasn’t trying to appease Iran. That he was tough on Iran. But coming from the Trump administration such a suggestion smacks of reckless belligerence, at least to the establishment media.
Last month, the U.S. and Iran engaged in a tit for tat with sanctions: “Iran hit Raytheon Co., United Technologies Corp. and 13 other U.S. companies with sanctions on Sunday for ‘propping up the Zionist regime’ of Israel, according to Iranian state media, retaliating against U.S.-imposed penalties on entities accused of aiding Iran’s missile program.”
Lost in the reporting is the media’s refusal to admit that Obama’s highly touted nuclear deal with Iran is nothing more than an unsigned collection of political commitments which can be broken by any party at any time. In fact, the media continue their fake news reporting by calling this deal “signed” in order to preserve the integrity of what is commonly viewed by his supporters as Obama’s signature foreign policy achievement. But it’s not clear why Trump calls it “signed.” Maybe he doesn’t know.
Warnings from newspapers such as the Post that a lack of good faith on the part of Trump will lead to a nuclearized Iran ignore the obvious conclusion that Iran will eventually become a nuclear power, and that in its current form the so-called agreement is virtually unenforceable.
Last week, CIA Director Pompeo told a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) audience that “We should all be mindful, given what took place in Syria, and go back and read that JCPOA when it talks about declared facilities and undeclared facilities and how much access the IAEA will have to each of those two very distinct groups.”
“So that might suggest to you what level of certainty we could ever hope to present to the commander in chief,” Pompeo continued. In other words, there is no certainty: if the intelligence community cannot guarantee knowledge of what is happening at undeclared facilities, then Trump, and America as a whole, will be left in the dark about Iran’s nuclear weapons progress. Iran could build the bomb without us finding out until it’s too late. In fact, intelligence experts that I have spoken with believe that Iran may already possess nuclear weapons. The unsigned deal is a document based on trust between the parties, yet Iran is clearly not worthy of such trust.
What we do know is that German intelligence found that Iran sought illegal nuclear technology in 2015. Similarly, Iran continues its ballistic missile tests. As Fred Fleitz—previously of the CIA, the DIA, the State Department and the House Intelligence Committee—has said, “The deal dumbed down the IAEA’s quarterly Iran reports…making it difficult for the world to know the true extent of Iran’s compliance.” The media urgently need to report that the inspections, and unsigned deal, are fatally flawed. But don’t look to a complicit, incestuous media to do anything that might undermine Obama’s legacy.
From Trevor Loudon's News Feed:
Also Black Lives Matter activist and Democratic Party member, Khalid Kamau, won 43% of the vote in a five-way primary, then 67% in the April 18th run-off.
Kamau’s impressive victory was won with massive DSA support. Marxists from across the country volunteered in, donated to and phone banked for comrade Kamau’s campaign.
According to Pittsburgh DSA:
Thanks to the work of DSA chapters across the country, including Pittsburgh DSA, Khalid Kamau won a whopping 43% of the vote in a five-way race. Our work helped put Khalid in a commanding 1st place, but it was short of the majority needed to win outright. Now we need to work together to put him over the top in the run-off election, so he can help advance the struggle for municipal victories around wages and housing.
“Far too many elected officials start their day thinking of your boss instead of you — but the working people of South Fulton will have a City Council member on their side: Khalid Kamau,” explained Maria Svart, Democratic Socialists of America’s national director. “Khalid’s win today is a tremendous victory for his community and a shot across the bow for politics as usual nationwide.”
Erin Parks, a Metro Atlanta DSA chapter member and Kamau campaign volunteer expressed enthusiasm: “Khalid’s campaign and victory prove that teamwork and a people-centered platform can prevail against all odds. His win is a harbinger of things to come in the Metro Atlanta progressive movement.”
Khalid entered today’s runoff election after coming in first place in a five-way primary election held in March with 43%. In that race, khalid won twice as many votes as the next runner up, and the highest percentage of any candidate running for any office in South Fulton. DSA members across the country made thousands of phone calls on behalf of khalid for both rounds of the election.
Khalid Kamau’s victory is part of a much bigger plan. DSA sees the new City of South Fulton as an opportunity to create the largest Progressive city in the South.
At February’s Young Democratic Socialists gathering, “Revolution at the Crossroads: Igniting the Socialist Resistance Against Trump,” Khalid Kamau “highlighted the right wing’s long-term strategy, especially their use of local races as a path for base building and candidate training. He argued that the left also needs to employ this strategy.”
In April 2017, Quad Cities Democratic Socialists of America member Dylan Parker was elected to the Rock Island City Council, 5th Ward Alderman, with DSA support.
Parker was the thirteenth DSA member holding elected office in the country, including Carlos Rosa, Chicago’s 35th Ward Alderman, Mike Sylvester of the Maine House of Representatives and Julie Ann Nitsch Austin Community College Board of Trustee in Texas.
Khalid Kamau’s victory is also indicative of DSA’s strong interest in Georgia. With more than 300 members in Atlanta alone, DSA aims to use upcoming Mayoral, Congressional and the next Gubernatorial race, to return a much more vulnerable than you might think Red State back to the Blue column.
Khalid Kamau’s victory was just a practice run.
From Trevor Loudon's News Feed:
By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media
Since MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow is still preoccupied with the supposed influence of Russia on President Donald Trump and the American political process, we suggest that the publication of a new book called Communism for Kids by MIT Press is worthy of her attention. On the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the 1917 Russian revolution, this book offers a glimpse into an uprising that was global in scope and which has not only destroyed the moral fiber of Russia, but has also done enormous damage to America.
The author of Communism for Kids, Bini Adamczak, writes that “the Russian revolution instilled new hope, particularly in women and people who did not identify themselves within the hetero-normative paradigm.” The “destruction of the family,” she writes, was the goal. “With the revolution, the right to legal abortion, both sexes’ right to divorce, the decriminalization of adultery, and the annulment of the sodomy law (which had previously prohibited homosexuality) were implemented and enforced,” she explains.
“In Moscow, one could find international communes led by gay communists,” she says. “Drag kings could become legitimate members of the Red Army. Participants of the revolutionary debates decided upon the destruction of the family, demanded the legalization of incest, and advertised the practice [of] polygamy.”
“Queer communism” is the battle cry of these modern Marxists, who label themselves “Queer communists” and identify with the origins of the Russian revolution.
It’s doubtful that Maddow, despite her “obsession” with Russia, will turn to this fascinating topic, since she is one of the liberal media’s open advocates of the homosexual lifestyle. She is a favorite of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA), which now calls itself the Association of LGBTQ Journalists.
On Thursday, in New York City, CNN’s Don Lemon will host a “star-studded event” for the NLGJA designed to raise tens of thousands of dollars for the organization’s programs. “More than 350 journalists, news executives, dignitaries and allies attend this event each year in what has become one of New York City’s must-attend media events,” the advertisement for NLGJA says.
The corporate media sponsors include Comcast/NBC Universal, Fox News, ABC News, CNN, CBS News and the New York Post.
Despite the virtual integration of the corporate media and the gay rights movement here in the U.S., Communism for Kids author Bini Adamczak writes that more advances have to be made in the field of “queer politics,” using the strategies of Marxist revolution. Eventually, she says, “modern reproduction technologies” could be used to “completely abolish the sexes.”
Transgender liberation is the next major frontier. She notes that “In her autobiographically inspired novel Stone Butch Blues, Leslie Feinberg grants readers a powerful insight into the connectedness of queer politics.” Feinberg, a Marxist member of the Workers World Party, was identified as “an anti-racist white, working-class, secular Jewish, transgender, lesbian, female, revolutionary communist.” Her last words before she died were, “Remember me as a revolutionary communist. Hasten the revolution!”
Another prominent advocate of “transgender liberation” is Bradley/Chelsea Manning, the former U.S. Army analyst sentenced to prison for espionage for his/her collaboration in the release by WikiLeaks of thousands of top secret intelligence reports. Former President Obama commuted Manning’s sentence, which was originally 35 years in prison for espionage, and he/she will now be released on May 17, after only seven years in prison. Manning was an open homosexual in the Army before deciding to become a woman.
“WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service,” declared President Trump’s new CIA director, Mike Pompeo. “It has encouraged its followers to find jobs at CIA in order to obtain intelligence. It directed Chelsea Manning in her theft of specific secret information. And it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States, while seeking support from anti-democratic countries and organizations.”
Yet Pompeo has not indicated whether the lax rules that are in place at the CIA and other intelligence agencies, permitting mentally disordered and confused transgender individuals to gain employment and get top secret security clearances, will be changed.
“It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is—a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia,” Pompeo said. “In January of this year, our Intelligence Community determined that Russian military intelligence—the GRU—had used WikiLeaks to release data of U.S. victims that the GRU had obtained through cyber operations against the Democratic National Committee. And the report also found that Russia’s primary propaganda outlet, RT, has actively collaborated with WikiLeaks.”
In his article for AIM, “CIA Funding and Recruiting LGBT,” Alex Nitzberg wrote about how the CIA maintains its own employee organization called “ANGLE,” which stands for the “Agency Network for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Officers and Allies.” Last December 16, the CIA itself announced that ANGLE had received an award for “promoting LGBT issues.”
Obama’s CIA Director John O. Brennan was quoted as saying, “It is difficult to overstate how heartening this progress has been to me. Indeed, one of the highlights of my tenure has been seeing the LGBT community blossom under the leadership of ANGLE and its cadre of devoted allies—a group to which I proudly belong.”
Brennan was also an ally of Muslim and pro-communist CIA employees. He personally voted communist before joining the agency in 1980.
The CIA has released a documentary “ANGLE of Ascent,” highlighting “the key role CIA leaders have played in building inclusive environments” and focusing on “the cultural shift that occurred within the Agency since the signing of Executive Order 12968, which gave LGBT officers the right to obtain a security clearance and serve openly in the Federal Government.”
“The CIA exists to gather and assess intelligence in order to protect America’s national security,” wrote Nitzberg. “Americans must decide whether they believe the CIA’s involvement in recruiting from and funding LGBT events serves to advance those objectives.”
But Americans are not given the opportunity to pass judgement because they are kept in the dark by elements of the news media in bed with the homosexual and transgender movements. As part of this collusion, Pompeo will be encouraged to continue Brennan’s pro-LGBT policies at the CIA. He will be threatened with the charge of “homophobia” if he decides to return the CIA to its mission of protecting America’s secrets.
- The growing list of special guests at Thursday’s NLGJA event includes:
Dari Alexander, WNYW; Jason Bellini, The Wall Street Journal; Gio Benitez, ABC News; Dan Bowens, WNYW; Frank Bruni, The New York Times; Kenneth Craig, CBS News; John Bannon Dias, News 12; Willie Geist, MSNBC; Kendis Gibson, ABC News; Sunny Hostin, The View; Preston Konrad, celebrity stylist; Steve Lacy, WNYW; Brett Larson, FOX News Headlines 24/7; Kyle Marimon, Fresco News; Jared Max, FOX News Headlines 24/7; John Meyer, Fresco News; Michael Musto, OUT.com; Court Passant, CBS Corporation; Lydia Polgreen, The Huffington Post; Caroline Que, The New York Times; Gus Rosendale, WNBC; Carolyn Ryan, The New York Times; Michelangelo Signorile, SiriusXM; Baruch Shemtov, WNYW; Lauren Simonetti, FOX Business Network; Steve Sosna, NBC4; Joanna Stern, The Wall Street Journal; Joe Toohey, WNYW; Kris Van Cleave, CBS News; and Jana Winter, investigative reporter.
Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org. View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.
The truth is often stranger than fiction and when it does finally come out, the twists and turns to the stories are shocking. So, it has been announced that the FBI and CIA are on a full blown mole search investigation to determine who within or as a contractor to the CIA is loyal or […]
Personally, why do we have to buyout any government employee? Just begin to defund departments within agencies and non-mandatory employees are laid-off right? Remember that quasi government shutdown during the Obama administration where no one missed anything that government did or didn’t do? Meanwhile, offering EPA employees an early buyout is an option for sure, […]
From Trevor Loudon's News Feed:
By: Lloyd Marcus
Award winning black actor and civil rights activist Samuel L. Jackson cut a radio ad for the congressional special election in Georgia. Jackson urged Georgia voters to vote democrat to stop racist and sexist Trump. http://bit.ly/2pJHfSy
Folks, as an American who happens to be black, I respectfully report that Mr Jackson has a history of delusional thinking in regards to race relations in America. Over the years, Jackson has repeatedly excoriated Americans. Recently, Jackson accused America of being “full of white supremacists” who elected a “white supremacist president.” http://bit.ly/2oinzVG
Everything out of this so-called civil rights activist’s mouth is counter productive to real black empowerment.
I challenge you to name a blockbuster Hollywood movie which does not feature Samuel L. Jackson. Okay, that statement may be a bit over the top, but you get my point. This guy is an awesome actor. His work ethic is legendary. Rather than trashing the millions of white movie goers who purchase tickets to see him, shouldn’t Jackson be focused on encouraging blacks to follow his lead?
What gets me about so many of these mega-wealthy and mega successful blacks is they never say “do what I did to become successful”; work hard, make responsible choices and strive for excellence. No, instead, these rich blacks betray their people by advocating the Democrats’ keep-them-on-our-plantation formula. These powerful black mouthpieces for the Leftist agenda tell blacks, “Y’all should demand more government assistance checks and democrats mandating lower standards for blacks.” Every Democrat so-called black empowerment program subliminally sends blacks the message that they are short-bus-to-school Americans. Leftists are peerless in their bigotry of lowered expectations in regards to black Americans.
This is why as a black conservative, I remain frustrated that Republicans are branded racist. In reality, Democrats are the true racists. My GOP brothers and sisters have never talked down to me or inferred that standards needed to be lowered to give me a fair shot.
That is all my 90 year-old black dad asked for back in 1952, a fair shot at becoming a Baltimore City firefighter. Despite horrific racist working conditions, dad won “Firefighter of the Year” two times without a single standard lowered for him. That’s what I’m talkin’ ’bout! http://bit.ly/2pajirD
By sticking his nose into the Georgia congressional election as a Democrat hack operative, Mr. Jackson is selling-out his people again; helping to falsely brand Trump a racist. Have you checked the numbers Mr. Jackson? Blacks suffered big time under 8 years of Obama; epidemic unemployment; socially and economically going backwards. http://bit.ly/1VJG0jM
Trump will be far better for blacks than Obama. http://bit.ly/2eSpXhS Mr. Jackson, I pray that you will get your head together. Please stop being a puppet, continuing Democrats’ decades of deceiving and exploiting blacks to keep them voting Democrat.
Mr. Jackson, please start proclaiming the truth to black youths, “Do what I did and you can have what I have.” Samuel L. Jackson’s net worth is approximately $165 million.
Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Author: “Confessions of a Black Conservative: How the Left has shattered the dreams of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Black America.”
Singer/Songwriter and Conservative Activist
Math – for many, mere mention of the subject sends chills down the spine. However, in the case of the Producer Reproducer Ratio, it isn’t the math that’s scary – it’s the implications.
The Producer Reproducer Ratio or, PRR, is a concept I came up with a few years ago in an effort to explain a point to a friend regarding the economics of childrearing. I derived the notion from my mother’s oft repeated comment in which she said “The nine months it takes to get ‘em here is easy, it’s the eighteen years it takes to raise ‘em that’s hard.” Having had six children of her own, I consider her a bit of an authority on the subject.
The PRR explains a fundamental concept of the economics of childrearing by converting my mother’s wisdom into a social mathematical principle. Every human being requires a certain amount of resources (food, clothing, shelter, medical care, etc.) during his or her lifetime. It is the responsibility of parents to provide these resources for their child until such time as that person can provide for himself or herself. The problem, of course, is that many people who are biologically capable of reproducing are unable or unwilling to produce the resources the child requires, thus shifting that burden to someone else.
Now comes the math (try not to panic): say a set of parents reproduces (R) one child (R = 1) and the parents are required to produce (P) the total amount of resources that one child requires for the first 18 years of life (P = 1). As long as the parents produce the necessary amount of resources for that child, P = R or, expressed as a ratio, 1:1. And that’s the way it works in most families. However, problems arise for instance, when the parents only produce half the resources the child needs, resulting in a change in the ratio to 0.5:1. In this case, someone other than the parents must provide the remaining resources. Occasionally, these parents are able to turn to other family members or friends but, all too often, the burden of making up the shortfall is passed along to the taxpayers.
Consider a more extreme example: say a set of parents has three children (R = 3) with the means or motivation to provide for only one of them (P =1) resulting in a PRR of 1:3. The bigger the R, the bigger the problem. As long as P = R, no shortage of necessary resources exists – parents are pulling their weight and properly providing for their children. When R exceeds P, shortages of resources arise and either the parents receive help from outside sources or the child goes lacking.
An alarming trend in our society is the growing rate at which R is exceeding P. Too many parents, usually young, poorly educated, often unmarried and ill-equipped to alter their own life circumstances, are having children with little or no regard for the provision of their most basic needs. Most assume the state will provide for their children. And why wouldn’t they assume such given the acculturation of entitlement to which so many of today’s young people have been exposed?
The PRR may remind us of a dull, dry, uninteresting mathematical formula we were required to learn in high school only to selectively forget the minute we graduated. In truth, it is a numerical reflection of an alarming social trend plaguing modern America. The choice to have a child is the most monumental decision a person can make in his or her lifetime. Regrettably, the biology of reproduction is all too often unaccompanied by the motivation for resource production. No decent person wants to see a child go lacking the essentials of everyday life. We recognize, after all, that the child isn’t at fault. However, by continuing to send the message that it’s okay to have children without consideration of, or provision for, their needs, we merely encourage the behavior.
Further, those who so flippantly disregard the daily needs of their children often fall far short in other areas of effective parenting as well. For the sake of the children, it is important to send the message that having them is acceptable only in the context of being prepared to properly care for them. Merely loving a child isn’t enough. Being a good parent is hard and, from time to time, even requires learning a little math beginning with the Producer Reproducer Ratio.
As a physician practicing full-time emergency medicine, I’ve spent thousands of hours treating patients in an acute care setting. During that time, I’ve seen America’s health care system at its best – lives saved, diseases cured, health restored. The daily contribution by our health care system towards the reduction of human pain and suffering is incalculable. American health care is unparalleled in the developed world and, without doubt, if a person is sick or injured, America is the place to be.
Regrettably, however, America’s health care system has a dark side as well – one populated by those who abuse themselves by abusing street drugs, alcohol, or prescription pain medications, those who chronically make poor lifestyle choices, and those who are generally out to beat the system. This dark side of America’s health care system is a side that, as a health care provider, I know all too well, yet, ominously, it’s a side many Americans don’t even know exists. Nevertheless, whether one is aware of this dark side of American health care or not, it’s a side that can hurt us all.
Average Americans are actually very decent people – hardworking, dependable, responsible, compassionate, charitable, and concerned about their fellow citizens. Further, the average American isn’t a substance abuser, doesn’t consistently make poor lifestyle choices, and isn’t out to get something for nothing. In fact, such activities are so typically foreign to them as to be beyond their awareness and even comprehension. Therefore, it often comes as a surprise to many of these average Americans when I recount the myriad stories of waste, fraud, and abuse I witness daily in the emergency room.
For instance, not so long ago, I treated a middle-aged woman who presented to the emergency room with a complaint of low back pain. The patient was well known to the ER staff, having been to that particular emergency room 43 times that year alone, of course, all at taxpayer expense. Her story was that someone had stolen her pain medication which she needed for a chronic back problem. Typical of this common scenario, the patient stated she hadn’t been able to see her doctor for a refill. When I asked her to describe the nature of her back problem, she couldn’t. When I asked what her MRI had shown, she explained that she’d never had one – the reason being that she missed her appointment. When I told her I would like to speak to her doctor, she proceeded to tell me she had recently stopped seeing her previous doctor and was in the process of finding a new one but hadn’t gotten around to it yet. Needless to say, I declined to write her a prescription for her pain medication after which she called me a few choice names of the four-letter variety.
The same night, another middle-aged woman arrived via ambulance to the emergency room. She was complaining of chest pain. It was her seventh ambulance transport to the ER that month – seventh – each time complaining of chest pain. Each time her cardiac workup was negative, yet, each time her urine drug screen was positive for cocaine. Though she had a healthy heart, the stimulant effect of the cocaine induced heart strain which resulted in significant pain and discomfort. Nevertheless, we were bound to perform a complete cardiac workup – the seventh that month – to the tune of many thousands of dollars, again, of course, at taxpayer expense.
Frustratingly, the above stories are so commonplace in emergency rooms across the country that they’ve essentially become clichés barely raising the eyebrows of health care providers. In fact, the problem is so extensive that few believe anything can be done to correct it. The waste, fraud, and abuse plaguing America’s emergencies rooms, a problem I’ve spoken about often and written about in the past, is costing productive Americans billions of dollars annually. I’ve long believed that if a portion of those wasted funds could be recouped by the government, Uncle Sam could afford to purchase private insurance coverage for every man, woman, and child in America.
And, yet, nothing is being done. Why? Several reasons. First, those who draw attention to the fact that certain patients abuse the health care system, particularly emergency rooms, are quickly labeled as uncompassionate. Further, medicine is a complex field and those with the expertise to suggest meaningful solutions to its many problems are generally outside the legislative process. In addition, with the ever-present threat of litigation hanging over its head, the health care industry is hesitant to even approach the subject of meaningful reform for fear of becoming mired in future lawsuits.
However, those concerns are no excuse for inaction. The health care reform America desperately needs is not in the form of socialized medicine but rather in legislation that promotes responsible utilization of our health care resources. In an emergency situation, in particular, inappropriate utilization of health care resources puts all Americans at risk. Imagine your mother, or husband, or best friend dying of a heart attack while awaiting the arrival of an ambulance that is delayed because it is being used to transport a crack addict to the hospital for the seventh time in a month. It’s time for Americans to get the word on what’s happening on the dark side of our health care system. After all, it’s what you don’t know about the American health care system that can hurt you.
Since America’s earliest days, education has consistently ranked at or near the top of the list of priorities most important to its citizens. Americans, in general, regard education as the single most valuable contribution we can make to the betterment of our children’s lives and to the overall long term health of the nation. Every year, America invests billions of dollars in our educational system from the primary and secondary levels to the college and graduate levels and beyond. As a result, America consistently produces many of the brightest, most educated, and most capable children in the world who go on to reach great heights of educational and professional achievement and lead meaningful, productive lives.
But what about the other kids?
Regrettably, however, many of America’s children miss the boat educationally, so to speak, and, therefore, fall far short of their potential. Americans are so concerned about this lamentable situation that the subject is constantly in the minds and on the tongues of political leaders, media personalities, pundits of every sort, and average Joes gathered around the coffee pot every morning at work. Theories abound as to the cause of the dilemma – not enough money spent on education, too many kids in the classroom, lack of local control of education, etc., etc., etc. Unfortunately, some even blame the teachers. Undoubtedly, the cause is complex and multi-factorial, however, with this last theory, in particular, I heartily disagree.
It never ceases to amaze me when I hear stories of out of control children reeking havoc in America’s classrooms. Stories abound of kids bringing guns to school, or getting busted on campus with crack cocaine in their pockets, or incidents involving educators being physically assaulted at school by aggressive, criminally-minded teenagers. What amazes me even more, however, is that after all that, teachers continue to teach. Holding their students’ welfare above their own, many educators continue to run the daily gauntlet of student apathy, misconduct, and open aggression in an effort to reach as many of their students as possible and, in so doing, often put themselves at great risk of harm – both emotional and physical.
Of course, having been an observer of our educational system for many years, both internally and externally, not to mention the fact that one of my sisters is a teacher and that I have many friends in the teaching professions, I have my own theories. I don’t believe the problem lies in a failure to spend enough on education. I believe we spend plenty. In fact, educational expenditure is often a poor predictor of outcome as many developed nations around the world spend less money per student and, yet, have higher performance on standard educational assessments.
I believe, rather, that lack of local control of educational systems, too much government regulation, and too many children in the classroom are factors much more deleterious to educational success than the amount of money spent per child. An even greater problem, in my opinion, is diversion – which is to say, too many diversions. Children these days have so many diversions (cell phones, concerns about fashion, sexual aggressiveness among certain students, drugs, peer pressure, etc.) that it isn’t at all difficult to understand their lack of focus on education.
Several years ago, I participated in a US-sponsored humanitarian relief mission in Nicaragua in which my unit built two schools and a clinic. Everyday at the work sites where the schools were being built, children from the local community gathered around and “played” school in the shade of the trees. They were so excited about having a school that they actually gathered there before the school was completed. They had few diversions – they were focused on the opportunity to go to school, so much so, that they pretended they were already in school before the schools even opened. That enthusiasm for education, I believe, is missing among many of America’s school-aged children and I believe the cause is too many diversions.
Nevertheless, whether I’m right or wrong on my theory of diversion, I’m convinced I’m right that teachers, in general, are not to blame when children fall short of their educational potential. In fact, I believe teachers are to be commended for continuing their struggles to overcome the diversions that distract children from their studies. Certainly, there is the occasional teacher that is subpar, but I believe that is the exception rather than the rule. It’s time to reaffirm our belief in, and support of, our teachers. They must know they have our confidence and our understanding. A teacher’s job is tough, especially these days with so many diversions competing for student’s attention. We need to help teachers and students alike by attempting to minimize the impact of these diversions so children can focus on their educations. And, most important of all, we need to stop blaming the teachers.
When you consider the thoughts and actions of our founding fathers, you’re liable to see brilliance, genius, forethought, and the truest displays of patriotism ever assembled on Earth. They were able to draw from experiences. imagination and education to develop our system of governance that would work, and work well for hundreds of years – even with all the changes in local and global economies, societies and political shifting.
This of course assumes that intelligence would rule as we go through our own societal changes and political fluctuations (or deviant deviations). Something we’ve seen plenty of lately.
And let’s face it. If we’re not seeing deviant insanity in our ruling bodies today, we never have or will. It’s running rampant and is so out of control, our country’s very existence was on the precipice this last November. The “out of the blue” win by Trump, while anticipated by some, was a total shock and awe of political war to the left who were celebrating their BIG WIN even while the last votes were coming in the early morning of Nov 9th.
I truly do not like looking at everything from a partisan view but would choose to consider things logically – reasonably – scrupulously – honestly – realistically. But these days it’s not possible, for you have to take into account – and counter – the insanity of 200% selfish, absurdly partisan, uninformed or misinformed and ignorant hacks who speak without any logic or honesty in their rhetoric against American citizens and their opponents.
For 8 years we saw the insanity of a president that, when a candidate, spoke harshly of Bush’s running up debt, then pursuing his own doubling of our national money commitment once in office. INSANE. We saw him introducing an acceptance and promotion of Muslim practices and ideals at a time we’re at war with radical Muslim forces. Unable even to name our enemy for fear of slandering his roots. INSANE.
We saw a degradation of our racial relationships and a further divide among our citizens because of B Hussein’s love of race as a weapon of society. INSANE. And we saw his hatred for our military and police through his actions of inserting himself into situations where presidential presence was not required, requested or warranted. INSANE.
We have elected leaders so stupid that they think islands are going to tip over or we have to pass a bill so we can know what’s in it because they didn’t even read it. Or a repeatedly elected representative that think’s she’s a freed slave and our constitution is 400 years old. And a sitting senator displays his stupid gene stating his constitution is different that our country’s. For the sake of disruption, liberals push scenarios of Russian intervention and invasion of our electoral system while offering no proof, no evidence of such, no reason or logical reason, when in fact Trump would be a much more powerful enemy than Clinton against them. INSANE INSANE INSANE! These people run our country, our lives.
The president has been in office barely 60 some days and even with a great SCOTUS pick and bringing back business, jobs, consumer confidence and investments into the country, some are already calling for impeachment. Think they have a right after what we put up with for 8 years?
We lived under the lawlessness of “social justice” for 8 years seeing over 80,000 criminals released early from their imposed sentences and a president that was ruled against for his unconstitutional actions regarding immigration – even though he allowed hundreds of thousands to cross our insecure borders unvetted and unfettered from who knows where. INSANE.
Obama pressed his “openness” and “accepting,” and yes, even “controlling” mindset by pushing for shared restrooms – while forsaking societal norms and reason. A new presence in the oval office has brought sanity back to our culture.
Trump is no Messiah. No savior of our nation in any religious sense. But for the good of the country, we trust that a business approach to our spending and revenue will produce a more stable, a more secure, and more responsive economic mood and growth. We’ve seen him reduce costs of government aircraft and is working to reduce drug costs – all things normal business people do while politicians shuffle other people’s money while seeking personal benefit. That’s INSANE.
Our recent election was, contrary to liberal desires, a change of direction, a return to reason, to law, to truthful governance and sanity. And hopefully a positive, blossoming fruitful season of prosperity vs poverty, true security vs socialism, sanity vs progressiveness.
Why do hospitals charge 10 bucks for an aspirin? If you’ve ever been a patient in a hospital, you’ve probably asked yourself that very question after reviewing your bill. And it’s a valid question. After all, if you can buy a bottle of aspirin at the drug store for pennies per pill, why, then, does a hospital find it necessary to charge 10 dollars for one? Is it a rip-off, a scam perpetrated on ill and vulnerable patients by heartless hospital administrators bent on making a profit regardless of the economic hardship thrust upon individual patients and society at large? Hardly. As angry as you might be at the notion of a hospital charging $10 for an aspirin, the reason they do so will truly make your blood boil.
Hospitals determine what to charge for an aspirin through a process called “cost accounting.” It’s a complex process that “accounts” for, or assigns, costs to the myriad steps involved in getting an aspirin from the manufacturer to your blood stream. First of all, the hospital must purchase the aspirin – likely a nominal cost in itself due to the hospital’s bulk purchasing power. But, then, a worker in the receiving department or pharmacy must unpack the aspirin (bottle) and store it in the proper place within the pharmacy. When an order comes in for an aspirin, a pharmacist or pharmacy technician must retrieve the aspirin and forward it on to the patient’s floor (some hospitals have a medication storage device on the wards from which nurses can retrieve medicines directly but these still must be stocked by a pharmacist or pharmacy tech).
Eventually, a nurse obtains the aspirin and gives it to the patient. She or he must then catalogue the act of dispensing the medicine in order to establish a record or “paper trail” of the act itself. From time to time, other hospital personnel review patient charts in order to confirm that the appropriate medicines were, in fact, dispensed. As mentioned above, the act of giving a patient an aspirin (or any other medicine for that matter) is a complex process with associated costs beginning with its purchase and extending even beyond the point at which the patient swallows the pill. As many as ten people, or more, are often involved in what otherwise seems to be a rather simple process. All these costs must be met and all these people must be paid (including hospital overhead such as utilities, supplies, maintenance and repairs, new equipment purchases, etc.).
Nevertheless, although the apparently simple act of giving an aspirin to a patient is, in fact, a complex and expensive process, it still only “accounts” for less than half the total cost of the aspirin – say $3 or $4 of the total $10 cost. So, from whence do the additional charges arise? Yep, you guessed it – from those patients who ultimately don’t pay their bills. There are, as the old saying goes, “no free lunches.” Someone has to pay those unpaid bills. These costs are spread among other charges within the hospital, such as the $10 aspirin. So, in truth, it isn’t the hospital’s fault for an aspirin costing $10 but, rather, those patients who cannot, or simply choose not, to pay their bills.
A substantial percentage of these non-pay patients are seen in America’s emergency rooms. In fact, unpaid bills arising from the emergency room are often a hospital’s largest annual unpaid expense. And hospitals across America are struggling under the economic strain caused by non-pay patients inappropriately utilizing emergency rooms for non-emergency conditions such as colds, insomnia, or chronic aches and pains, and medication refills. Such non-emergency conditions should be handled at the patient’s doctor’s office. But visiting a doctor at his/her office often means paying a nominal co-pay. Why would a patient do that when they can just go to the emergency room for “free?”
In this age of “healthcare reform,” the regrettable truth is that the government has missed (or chosen to ignore) a key point in the overall problem of rising health care costs – that inappropriate utilization of health care resources by those having no intention whatsoever of paying for them is a major factor driving the rise in health care costs. Until these individuals are forced to assume financial responsibility for their own health care needs, productive Americans will continue to bear the burden of these costs.
Why do politicians continue to ignore this obvious and egregious problem? Because it is politically uncomfortable for them. Most politicians are concerned, first and foremost, about their re-election. Therefore, they don’t want to risk alienating part of their constituency by supporting measures that would require these patients to become responsible consumers of health care resources like the rest of us. Until these politicians alter their focus and become true leaders, we can expect to continue paying $10 for an aspirin.
In a supreme act of both insight and foresight, America’s Founding Fathers established the greatest system of government the world has ever known – bar none. From its most humble beginnings, our American republic has become what President Reagan famously called a “shining city on a hill,” and is considered the benchmark of self-government the world over. The sometimes delicate, sometimes rugged system of checks and balances they created has withstood countless challenges from economic catastrophes to social upheavals to presidential assassinations to world wars and, rather than being diminished, has each time emerged stronger.
Nevertheless, in spite of our government’s obvious strengths, each branch possesses certain flaws that reduce its overall effectiveness. Of the three branches of our republican system of government – legislative, executive, and judicial – it is the legislature that suffers the greatest of these flaws. In fact, at least two such flaws – the lack of term limits for its members and the ability to attach myriad unrelated pieces of legislation to important bills – are so profound they actually constitute failures of the branch itself.
Though he was beloved by millions of Americans, elected officials saw President Roosevelt’s repeated election to the presidency (he was elected four times, dying in office shortly after beginning his fourth term) as a threat to democracy itself. As a result, the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, ratified February 27, 1951, limited to two the number of terms any person may serve as president. Curiously, these same legislators (and most legislators since) failed to apply the same logic to their own offices.
Congress and the many state legislatures across America are filled with people who’ve served multiple terms – some for 20 or 30 years or even longer. This is actually anti-democratic on at least two levels. First, the longer these people serve, the less likely other qualified candidates are to run against them. The result is a diminishment of democracy itself as voters ultimately experience less choice in government. This situation serves well the elected official, but not the electorate. Democracy is further damaged by the tremendous influence long-serving politicians accumulate through relationships with various individuals and special interest groups developed during their tenure. The old saying, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” applies in these situations as such influence often leaves politicians unaccountable to the voters.
Otto von Bismarck is attributed (possibly erroneously) with the saying, “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.” Whether the German statesman actually made that famous quote or not, the message is clear – legislating is a dirty business. However, it isn’t the act of debating the merits of a particular piece of legislation that is so dirty but, rather, the back room deals, the whispers in the hallways, the winks and the nods that are so offensive to the notion of representative democracy – a.k.a., a republic. It is these seedy, underhanded dealings, which many elected officials consider a matter of course, that are an affront to American voters who put their faith in the electoral process and representative government. These acts are, in fact, anathema to “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”
A by-product of long-serving politicians is the strangle hold that certain of these people have on the chairmanships of important legislative committees such as appropriations. No single person should hold these seats year after year after year. The result is a concentration of power that leaves other legislators (and, therefore, other regions of the country) beholden to the whims and wishes of the chairman.
Even worse, however, than the unfair concentration of power and influence resulting from the lack of term limits is the utter catastrophe of representative government that stems from the legislature’s ability to attach completely unrelated provisions to important pieces of legislation. In fact, this legislative tactic constitutes the greatest single weakness of the entire legislative process in that, rather than risk failure of important legislation, legislators will accept nearly any attachment regardless of how esoteric or irrelevant in an effort to gain passage of the larger bill. Through this means, representatives and senators succeed in funding countless pork barrel projects designed to assure their re-election. And, of course, it’s all at taxpayer expense.
Instituting term limits and curtailing the attachment of irrelevant legislation to important bills in the House and Senate would do much to restore faith in our system of government by enhancing its equitableness and cost effectiveness. However, regrettably for the American electorate, legislators benefit far too much to correct these two great failures of the legislative branch.
It’s one of the liberal national media’s most beloved and oft repeated phrases – “We are a nation of immigrants.”
Well, sorry to let the cat out of the bag but, actually, no we’re not. We are a nation of Americans. Of course, it’s true there are a lot of first-generation immigrants here, however, don’t be fooled by repetitive liberal rhetoric designed to indoctrinate you into their way of thinking – the number of bona fide, non-immigrant Americans far exceeds the number of those newly arrived on our shores.
To test my point, perform a little experiment – first of all, think about yourself and your own family and ask yourself these simple questions: “Was I born here?” If the answer is “Yes,” then you’re not an immigrant. Next, ask: “Were my parents born here?” If the answer to that question is also “Yes,” then your parents aren’t immigrants either. For me, I can ask that question sequentially of my ancestors with the answer being “Yes” at least eight times which is as far back as my family has ancestry records. The point is that I’m not an immigrant, nor are my parents, nor my grandparents, nor my great-grandparents, nor my great-great-grandparents, nor, well, you get the picture.
Now, to further test my point, consider your friends and co-workers – were they born here? Chances are the answer is “Yes.” And chances are their parents were born here as were their grandparents as were their great-grandparents as were, well, again, you get the picture.
In fact, the total number of true first-generation immigrants in America today isn’t even close to the total number of bona fide, non-immigrant, multi-generational Americans living in this country. So why does the liberal media persist in attempting to convince us that we are a “nation of immigrants?” Lots of reasons.
The most important reason is political – the Democratic Party holds itself out to be the “party of the immigrant.” Stories of Tammany Hall operatives standing on the docks of New York harbor in the 1800s and early 1900s encouraging, and even coercing, Irish-immigrants as they exited the boats to “vote democratic” are legendary. Immigrants have long served as a source of new voters for the Democratic Party. The liberal Left, long the mouth-piece of the Democratic Party, continues to promote the “party of the immigrant” notion through its pro-immigrant rhetoric. But truth is, the Democratic Party doesn’t so much love immigrants as it loves their votes.
Another lesser reason for the liberal Left’s persistent pet phrase is political correctness – in stating openly and repeatedly that we are a “nation of immigrants,” the Left is attempting to create a sense of acceptance of immigrants (especially illegal ones), thus diffusing many of the practical issues concerning immigration including, most importantly, illegal immigration. By repeating the phrase over and over and over, the Left is attempting, through the power of suggestion and conditioning, to induce the average American to over-identify with immigrants, thus becoming lulled into a sense of complacency about immigration issues.
Now, it’s important for the reader to understand that I am not a xenophobe – I don’t have anything personally against any “legal” immigrant. For those immigrants who come to this country legally, work hard, and play by America’s rules, I say, “Good luck and more power to you.” It’s also important for the reader to understand, however, that I believe “illegal” immigration in this country is more than just a problem, it’s an outright calamity. Further, because I’ve long dismissed “political correctness” as a bogus liberal ideological construct, I’ve never been afraid to recognize illegal immigration for what it is – a dangerous influence in our society.
Of course, those of a liberal mindset would attempt to dismiss my views on immigration issues as unfounded except, of course, for the fact that I understand immigrants and immigration better than most – you see, there were and are first-generation immigrants in my own family. Though he died tragically in a motorcycle accident in 1981, a former brother-in-law of mine was born in Mexico, given up for adoption, and raised in the United States. Before his death, he and my middle sister had three children – he was a favorite of my family, adored then and missed now. I have another brother-in-law, alive and well, who immigrated to America from Pakistan in the early 1980s. He and my youngest sister married not long after his arrival and they also have three children. He, too, has been a favorite of my family for many, many years.
The difference, of course, is that my brothers-in-law played/play by the rules – they were/are proud of their heritage but were/are more proud of being Americans. They came here legally, embraced American values, worked hard, and didn’t wear their immigrant status on their sleeves, waving it as a banner under the noses of those Americans like me and most of you who were born here.
So, the next time you hear someone on the Left attempt to indoctrinate you by saying, “We are a nation of immigrants,” say to yourself and those around you, “Hardly,” and recognize the truth that, even though there are many immigrants here, we are actually a “nation of Americans.”
The political philosophy known as libertarian socialism has always been a subject of intrigue for me. Libertarian socialism, also known as left-libertarianism, is defined as a group of anti-authoritarian political philosophies inside the socialist movement that rejects socialism as centralized state ownership and control of the economy, as well as the state itself. I am amused that the socialist movement would attach themselves to any form of libertarianism whatsoever. Libertarianism and socialism are antithetical political philosophies.. Libertarianism promotes freedom, choice, and individualism, while socialism nurtures intrusive government, servitude, and slavery. While these two doctrines are in direct opposition of each other, libertarian socialism is a separate entity.
Advocates of libertarian socialism strongly believe that capitalism cripples freedom. In their minds, power and privilege for the wealthy are offshoots of capitalism. Libertarian socialists endorse the abolition of private property and the state, which directly contrasts with the separate ideologies of libertarianism and socialism. Libertarians support the rights of private property, since it is an extension of self ownership. Socialists, however, thrive on state ownership to enforce what they perceive as equality. The stark disparity between libertarianism and socialism makes it impossible to combine these ideologies in any way.
Libertarianism socialism has frequently been linked to anarchism, although the validity of these claims is debatable. While each of these philosophies oppose big government, anarchism stems from capitalistic roots, not socialistic ones. Anarchism is the absence of all government. Libertarian socialists claim to oppose the government, yet rely on it to halt the production of private property. Libertarian socialism is the ultimate oxymoron. No matter what spin you put on the matter, you cannot be a libertarian and a socialist. The positions are too far apart on the spectrum. In this particular situation, the horseshoe theory does not apply.
Written by: Gabrielle Seunagal
Gabrielle Seunagal is a young, outspoken conservative woman. Passionate about politics and currently residing in Alpharetta, Georgia, Gabrielle is a Republitarian/Constitutionalist Red Nation Rising Contributor and writes editorial/opinion articles. On Twitter she is @ClassySnobb
We are a Red Nation Rising of Centrists, Conservatives and Libertarians uniting to the right for Civics & Constitutionalism! From one single Tweet to one BILLION Grassroots, Organic Social Media Impressions per month, Red Nation Rising™ is an Internet phenomenon which has transitioned to a serious, national, grassroots organization.
In his famous poem, “Mending Wall,” Robert Frost’s neighbor says to the poet during their annual ritual of rebuilding the stone wall between their property, “Good fences make good neighbors.” Most people agree that walls are good for neighbors, but when it comes to nations, some are sitting on the proverbial “fence.”
The recent debate regarding the value of building a fence along the border between the United States and Mexico provides an example of this dilemma. Some argue that the wall is a necessary first step toward stemming the flow of illegal aliens flooding across our southern border while others contend a fence is unnecessary and “sends the wrong message.”
As for me, I hold with those who support building the fence. Here’s why: First of all, although we are a nation of immigrants, we are, much more importantly a nation of laws. Illegal immigrants, and those who support them, completely ignore our laws. Existing U.S. immigration legislation provides a mechanism for legal immigration into this country. However, because abiding by these laws requires time and effort, illegal aliens choose to ignore them.
Secondly, illegal immigration could potentially jeopardize our national security, thus placing every American at risk. It’s no secret that members of various terrorist organizations have declared war on America. As security at airports and seaports around the country increases, these terrorists will undoubtedly seek other routes of entry into the U.S. Our largely unprotected southern border will eventually become, if it hasn’t already, a logical entry point.
Thirdly, contrary to popular belief, our economy suffers in myriad ways as a result of illegal immigration. To begin with, the vast majority of illegals don’t pay taxes on their income, thus significantly reducing government revenues. The burden of this lost revenue is shouldered by taxpaying-Americans in the form of higher income taxes. Furthermore, since illegal aliens send home most of the money they earn in the U.S., billions of dollars are being removed from our economy annually. Additionally, the influx of low-skilled workers overly expands the available workforce, thus eliminating the incentive for employers to increase the minimum wage and reducing the earning potential of young and/or low-skilled American workers.
Finally, the sheer number of illegal aliens overburdens our infrastructure and drains our resources, especially regarding health care. For every dollar that illegal immigrants put into the U.S. economy, many more dollars are taken out.
Recently, in an effort to cast their argument in a more favorable light, advocates of illegal immigration have referred to President Reagan’s famous Berlin Wall speech in which he admonished Soviet President Gorbachev to “tear down this wall.” The point they sorely miss is that the Berlin Wall was built to keep people in, not out. The opposite would be true of America’s wall – it would be built to protect, not oppress.
Good neighbors may need good fences, but good nations shouldn’t. Unfortunately, in their refusal to do anything to stop their citizens from illegally entering our country, our neighbors to the south have demonstrated they have no intention of being good. Hopefully, our wall will send a clear message – that immigrants must respect our laws and enter our country legally. Only then will our wall be seen as a wall that mends, rather than divides.
In the course of my work I’m fortunate to interact with some fabulous people. One such a person – Andrew Nagorski. One of the most fascinating people I’ve talked with. [You can read his more complete bio is HERE.]
Andrew Nagorski is an award-winning journalist and author who spent more than three decades as a foreign correspondent and editor for Newsweek.
He has served as senior editor for Newsweek International, launched Newsweek Arabic in 2000; Newsweek Polska, in 2001; Newsweek Russia in 2004; and Newsweek Argentina in 2006. Nagorski has been honored three times by the Overseas Press Club for his reporting.
He was Newsweek’s Berlin bureau chief from 1996 to 1999, Warsaw bureau chief from 1990 to 1994, and served two tours as Newsweek’s Moscow bureau chief. From 1978 to 1980, Nagorski was the Hong Kong-based Asian regional editor for Newsweek International and then as Hong Kong Bureau Chief.
We talked about his exciting background as well as about his most recent book, “The Nazi Hunters,” a detailed account of the worldwide search for those who tortured, maimed and massacred in the name of the German Fatherland. You’ll find his book here on Amazon.
This is part two on our interview journey. (Part 1 is HERE)
RB – In your years of writing overseas for Newsweek, did situations of intrigue, danger and history make you a better writer, allowing a better story when in such precarious situations than a guy that shows up, asks questions and goes home?
AN – I think it has to. Once you go through an experience like that, you want to be able to describe it in detail not just some humdrum story that limits itself to “ok, I interviewed this guy and this is what that person said.” How you got the story becomes part of the story. You have to become more adept at writing the description and narrative.
In my latest book, “The Nazi Hunters” when I would go to someone’s house and talk with them, I wanted to describe the scene and that person’s emotions, not just what he or she did. You want to put the reader in the situation, allowing the reader to feel what you felt.
RB – In that most recent book, you extensively researched the efforts of those seeking to find and bring to justice those who committed some of the most heinous atrocities in human history. Do you feel a personal attachment or commitment to documenting such stories?
AN – You can’t help but feel such a commitment when people confide such stories. When I was in Poland in 1995, for instance, we decided to do a Newsweek cover story about the 50th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. I tried to find every survivor I could to tell the story of the last 6 months of the camp. So I went all around Europe finding survivors. You don’t sit down with scripted questions in such situations since I found that the survivors usually poured out the stories of what happened. And there are always personal experiences and stories you’ve never heard. You can’t help but be affected by those stories.
One such untold story was about the Israeli Mossad’s effort to kidnap Adolf Eichmann from Argentina, and then fly him to Israel for trial. But El Al had no regular flights between Argentina and Israel. A special flight was planned but what if that didn’t work? Plan B was to bring him by ship to Israel and the only ships available were cargo ships that brought Argentine kosher beef there. In the end, they got Eichmann out on the special flight. But if that hadn’t worked, he could have been smuggled on an Israeli ship carrying kosher beef. Some irony.
RB – With your books’ more specific subjects, is your background Jewish?
AN – I was born into a Polish Catholic family and raised as a Catholic. I don’t think you need to be Jewish to have an interest in the Holocaust and World War II. What happened in that era has much broader ramifications about human behavior, demonstrating that people are capable of both good and evil. It is hard for anyone of us who did not live in such a dangerous period to imagine what people went through—much less to know how we would have behaved under similar circumstances. But we should try to understand those circumstances as much as possible, and I hope my books help readers do that.
RB – We’ve worked several times for the Holocaust Memorial Museum in DC. In doing those projects, we see such an intense passion, a need to carry the torch of historical remembrance ingrained in that segment of society. It seems at times to be an overwhelming memory instilled in every man, woman and child. Does the history of that era ever diminish, or is it necessary to honor those who sacrificed so much and to prevent its re-occurrence? Is it tough to write about such human carnage?
AN – You owe it to the victims not to forget them and just write off their fate as a normal consequence of war. There also has to be some lesson learned from our recent history. The Nuremberg and other trials after the war offered one such clear lesson: it is never acceptable to excuse mass murder and atrocities by saying, as almost all the Nazis did, that they were just following orders. We are all responsible for our actions.
RB – And it’s not just the physical impact but the mental anguish for generations…
AN – …Yes, but there’s even more anguish if these stories are bottled up and forgotten. When I interviewed the Auschwitz survivors, I would tell them that if we touched on any part that was too, painful, we could stop the interview at any time. After telling me his life story in great detail, one survivor said: “I never told anyone any of this because no one in my family was interested.” I was stunned. Many people kept things bottled up for decades and the younger generation was so concerned with their own lives that they never asked about grandpa’s situation.
RB – Most people never find themselves on the world stage of events. In your time covering Europe and beyond, did you have the feeling of being a part of a greater involvement – an inside view of something important? Or is your thinking just directed to meeting the people, getting the story, finding the facts and presenting the events in order to engage others more than yourself?
AN – I don’t want to overstate my role as an observer but I do feel there were times I was very fortunate to have the chance to witness history in the making and to report on it. I was lucky to be in certain situations where I could relate a story with meaning and realism. I felt that with the Solidarity movement, for example, I was able to tell the story and thereby perhaps contribute a bit to their effort to gain their freedom.
RB – When you look at your experiences and travels with intrigue and danger etc., what was the most fun you ever had?
AN – That’s a good question. Maybe interviewing Boris Becker or traveling with Pope John Paul II, who of course was Polish. He did not give formal press conferences, but on trips on his chartered Alitalia plane where he and his entourage were in the front and the international press corps would be in the back. He’d wander down the aisle and everybody would get to ask one question and it was fascinating. He was so multilingual that the international reporters would ask a question and he would usually respond in the language of the reporter. It was amazing to watch. I could ask my questions in Polish, and I felt I was giving him a bit of a break when I did so.
In the 80’s during the Reagan years, during the arms buildup, I got to take a flight in an F-16 trainer after they crammed weeks of safety drills into 45 minutes. During the flight, I really came to understand the concept of g-forces in a very direct way. I managed to avoid getting sick—but just barely. I also got to drive an M-1 tank, that was really fun – sort of like driving a large motorcycle. Those were incredible experiences that allowed me to get some feel of what others do on a daily basis. You come away with real respect for the men and women in our armed forces.
RB – Seeing the leader of a worldwide church, which isn’t totally a political position, have you seen a shift with the current Pope – do you see a difference with his political involvements?
AN – Of course there are always personal agendas and backgrounds, Pope John Paul was the first non-Italian Pope elected in 453 years and some thought he was too focused on Poland. Pope Francis, who is from Argentina, has a different mindset. Some of the issues in Latin America, such as economic and social inequalities, loom larger in his thinking. While John Paul was often critical of capitalism as well as communism, Pope Francis often sounds more strident in his critiques of Western societies.
RB – As a conclusion, and based on your view of history and bringing your book, The Nazi Hunters into the discussion, are there any comparisons to be made between Nazism and modern day ISIS, their methods and execution of their long-term plan?
AN – I think the difference is that ISIS is not a state, not organized in the same way as Nazi Germany. But in terms of their ruthlessness and willingness to go to extremes, yes there are parallels. It is worth remembering that when Hitler was rising to power he was saying things that seemed so extreme that people would rationalize that he can’t really mean it. They assumed he was not going to try to eliminate all the Jews and eliminate political opposition, and that once in office he’d become more moderate. So there may be a lesson there. When ISIS says they are going to eliminate Israel then you need to take them seriously and not believe they don’t mean it. They think in totally different terms than most of us and for them there are no boundaries; they are operating outside anything we consider to be a normal mindset.
My thanks to Andrew for his friendship and taking an extra amount of time to talk about an extraordinary life filled with adventure, history and intrigue.
In pursuit of good reading from quality research, I’m confident you would enjoy the view of history from Andrew Nagorski. A real-life review from the ground where it all happened.
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
|George Santayana, 1863-1952 / The Life of Reason: The Phases of Human Progress (Cir. 1905)|
In the course of my work I’m fortunate to meet, and work with, some fabulous people. Interesting people with diverse backgrounds, lives of accomplishment, even intrigue. Over the last couple of years I’ve had the chance to interact with such a person – Andrew Nagorski. One of the most fascinating people I’ve ever talked with. [You can read his more complete bio is HERE.]
In light of today’s ongoing journalistic fiasco with the media, I present this interview, as it shows what takes place in the process of reporting world events, and the lengths that a good reporter will go to in order to get a true, in-depth and honest story for his readers.
Andrew Nagorski is an award-winning journalist and author who spent more than three decades as a foreign correspondent and editor for Newsweek.
From January 2000 to July 2008, Nagorski served as senior editor for Newsweek International, handling the editorial cooperation between the parent magazine and its expanding network of foreign language editions, launched during his tenure. Newsweek Arabic in 2000; Newsweek Polska, in 2001; Newsweek Russia in 2004; and Newsweek Argentina in 2006. Nagorski has been honored three times by the Overseas Press Club for his reporting.
He was Berlin bureau chief from 1996 to 1999, providing in-depth reporting about Germany. From Berlin, Nagorski also covered Central Europe, taking advantage of his long experience in the region and his knowledge of Polish, Russian, and German.
From 1990 to 1994, he served as Newsweek’s Warsaw bureau chief, and he served two tours as Newsweek’s Moscow bureau chief. In 1982, he gained international notoriety when the Soviet government, angry about his enterprising reporting, expelled him from the country. After spending the next two and a half years as Rome bureau chief, he became Bonn bureau chief.
From 1978 to 1980, Nagorski was the Hong Kong-based Asian regional editor for Newsweek International and then as Hong Kong Bureau Chief.
In 2009, Poland’s Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski presented Nagorski with the newly created Bene Merito award for his reporting from Poland about the Solidarity movement in the 1980s. In 2011, Poland’s President Bronislaw Komorowski awarded him the Cavalry Cross for the same reason. In 2014, Poland’s former President and Solidarity leader Lech Walesa presented the “Lech Walesa Media Award” to Nagorski “for dedication to the cause of freedom and writing about Poland’s history and culture.”
In our discussions, I had an opportunity to delve into some background as well as talk about his most recent book, “The Nazi Hunters,” a detailed account of the worldwide search for those who tortured, maimed and massacred in the name of the German Fatherland. You’ll find his book here on Amazon.
This is the first of two parts on our interview journey.
RB – So many of us go to school, learn a trade or follow in family footsteps, finding a comfortable path of interest, but rarely do people venture out, following another route to more exciting careers. What motivated you to step out and take the course you did?
AN – First, for me it was part of what my father did. He was a risk taker, brought up in Poland, studied law and then Germany attacked Poland in ’39. As a soldier, he and other Polish soldiers were ordered to report to POW camps. He escaped instead, traveling by foot with others and eventually winding up in Paris then Britain. After the war when I was born, my parents came to the United States as political refugees. He started a small news service focusing on life behind the Iron Curtain, and then joined the U.S. foreign service. When I was growing up we lived in Cairo, Seoul and Paris. So I was exposed to many places and cultures, and hearing a lot about the war and history. I also grew up bilingual, since my parents made sure that we spoke Polish at home.
It was probably only natural that I majored in history in college and then was attracted to journalism as a profession. Right after college I spent three years teaching high school social studies. But I then jumped at the opportunity to do a “try out” at Newsweek that developed into a full time job.
RB – And did writing books then naturally follow as an extension of your reporting?
AN – In my case, it did. Writing for a magazine or a newspaper, you’re forced to compress your stories and leave out some of things you find really interesting. You leave out the back story and wish you had more space to develop it. In the back of my mind I always wanted to write a book. In ’82 I was expelled from the Soviet Union because the Kremlin didn’t like my reporting; as a result I became the story as sometimes happens with reporters. I was disappointed not to stay but saw an opportunity to write a first-person account of my impressions of the Soviet Union and that became my first book.
My next book focused on the transformation of Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary after the collapse of communism, something I also witnessed firsthand as a reporter.
But living in places like Moscow, Berlin, Bonn and Warsaw, I was also constantly confronted with the legacy of the war and the Holocaust and the question of how Germany could ever have been taken over by Hitler and his Nazi movement. I still had the opportunity to interview many people who had lived through that era, and I began writing books on those subjects.
RB – In your positions you’ve seen many events that shaped the world, met many people that participated in, watched the growth or destruction of societies. From Steven Spielberg to Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin, tennis legend Boris Becker to Kurt Waldheim. In their presence, did you get a true look into their political and societal soul, or were they so influenced by their positions, politics and affiliations that the true person wasn’t doing the interview?
AN – It’s always a challenge to interview major figures, since they are usually careful about how they answer your questions. They can appear very scripted. But if you got to know someone before they rose to a top position, you have a better chance of breaking through the talking points. For instance, I interviewed Lech Walesa, when the Solidarity movement he led was still struggling against repression. When it triumphed in 1989 and he became Poland’s first freely elected president, I could still talk to him more informally than others could who were interviewing him for the first time. The same was true of Vaclav Havel, the dissident playwright who led the “Velvet Revolution” in Czechoslovakia
It’s also interesting to do interviews with rising starts in other fields.
In Monte Carlo I interviewed Boris Becker when he was 19; he was already the number 2 ranked tennis player in the world and it was easy to forget how young he still was. When I completed our interview, he stretched his arms and I could see that he had been sweating. I realized that he had been more nervous about the interview than I was, although he was the star and I just the journalist. He could go out and beat the best tennis players in the world, but he was still a kid and nervous about talking to a representative of a major news organization.
RB – During your time in the field for Newsweek and others, you certainly had your time behind a desk, researching and writing. But when those assignments demanded the more involved, clandestine, even dangerous times; being followed by the KGB, or shedding the watchful eye of the government police intent on denying you a secret interview with Bujak, the leader of the Polish underground; did you feel the intrigue, the threats, the dangers, or were you so focused on the story as the centerpiece of your thinking?
AN – You always want to get the story but part of the story is getting the interview, and you can’t help but be affected by the tension surrounding it. Ron, you mentioned the meeting with the leader of the underground Solidarity movement, Zbigniew Bujak, who was the most wanted man in Poland at the time. They had imposed martial law and he was on the run.
I was approached by Solidarity activists and asked if I wanted an interview with Bujak; I said sure but I don’t want to bring the secret police to his door and have him arrested. They said don’t worry about that – be at this corner at 6 pm and someone will come by and give you a signal and you follow them. We went through a courtyard and out a door, jumped in a car that pulled up, drove around the city, got out again and went through another courtyard and into another car, and so forth until they were sure no one could be tailing us. We wound up at an apartment building on the outskirts of Warsaw and I was brought to an upper floor apartment and had a 3 hour interview with Bujak. I was excited and a bit nervous, but mainly because I did not want to endanger Bujak.
In part 2 we’ll hunt Adolf Eichmann in South America, travel with Pope John Paul II and touch on the ISIS/Nazi connection.
My thanks to Andrew for his friendship and taking an extra amount of time to talk about an extraordinary life filled with adventure, history and intrigue.
In pursuit of good reading from quality research, I’m confident you would enjoy a view of history from Andrew Nagorski. A real-life review from the ground where it all happened.
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
|George Santayana, 1863-1952 / The Life of Reason: The Phases of Human Progress (Cir. 1905)|
In my writings over the last few years, I’ve been fortunate to have interviewed some very interesting people. News makers and news breakers who have an inside track to political and societal happenings that intrigue and fascinate us.
I can’t take the space to recount their whole interviews but I wanted to pass on some passages of our interaction as we observe the perception of our country’s state of well being. Even from a few years ago, their words still ring true with truth and relevance in the subjects of journalism, race, immigration and American values.
Editor and Chief Executive Office of World Net Daily – better known to many as WND.com – Mr. Joseph Farah.
RB – As you look at today’s journalistic scene, what percentage of legitimate media are doing the American public and service, or disservice in their reporting?
JF – “I’d say less than 1 percent of the press is doing its job. And what is that job? What is the central role of a free press in a free society? To serve as a watchdog on government and other powerful institutions. There is no other answer that is legitimate.
And why? The free press was literally birthed in colonial America. It had never existed previously. Yet, the founding fathers in their wisdom recognized the inherent, inalienable right for a free press for the first time in history and enshrined special protections within the First Amendment of the Constitution. They did that because they believe in lots of checks and balances on government power. That’s why we have a free press in America.
It wasn’t because the founders believed in an inherent, unalienable right to publish pornography. It wasn’t because they wanted to ensure ‘deflate-gate’ would be exposed so as not to tarnish the Super Bowl. It wasn’t because they wanted to provide a forum for celebrity news. It was because they knew government and other powerful institutions would strangle liberty if they got the chance.
Unfortunately, the American press has given those powerful institutions that chance. In fact, too much of the press is owned by such powerful institutions.”
RB – Are we really dealing with so many “low information voters” that the real truth no longer matters, only the messages of “what’s free, what’s in it for me socially, financially, occupationally, politically?”
JF – “The public school system has indeed – I believe with intent – dumbed down the populace. The press plays a role in this too. Too many in the press today are disinformation artists rather than real journalists passionate about the truth.”
Dennis Michael Lynch (or DML as he prefers) is an American businessman, documentary film maker, and conservative political commentator. He often appeared as a guest on Fox News, The Kelly File, and The Blaze.
He has captured America’s eye and focused it on such subjects as the growing immigration problem with successful films such as “THEY COME TO AMERICA”, “WE RIDE TO DC,” and “FIGHTING FOR AMERICA.”
RB – Having witnessed 9/11 first hand, it must have been such a life changing impression. You started with shorter, simpler, more commercially appealing films, but did you find the goal pretty quickly to start your pursuit of telling the important stories or did that take time to evolve during your studies?
DML – “After living 9/11 and seeing my fellow Americans jump from 80 stories, and after seeing what 19 people could do to the most powerful country on Earth, I decided to make a change. I no longer desired to continue as a CEO and chase money, but instead chase my dream of making films. And during the making of my first film “King of the Hamptons’, which includes many Hollywood stars, I met a man who protests against illegal immigration each and every day. He does this because he lost his ability to earn a living because of the illegal aliens who undercut his prices (he’s a contractor). And so he protests on the corner of a 7-Eleven where dishonest contractors come to pick up the illegal aliens who stand there each morning looking for work. After speaking with the guy (Tom), I decided to make a film about illegal immigration and its impact on America.”
RB – When you started your quest for immigration research and documentation, did you ever imagine the many stories of incidents like San Francisco’s Kate Steinle, or the Kansas City woman kidnapped at knife point, repeatedly raped and driven to New York by an illegal, two Virginia girls killed by the illegal Alfredo Ramos driving drunk or our own Arizona police officer killed by an illegal drunk driver? Add to these the hundreds, no thousands of crimes committed by first time and returning illegals?
DML – “I had NO IDEA about the amount of crime generated by illegal aliens. Most people have no idea how bad it is, unless of course you’re one of the victims, or a loved-one of a victim.
I receive gifts and letters in the mail each week, and some of them make me cry. Example. I had a veteran send me his medal from Vietnam and ask, “Please don’t stop doing what you do, my son was killed by an illegal alien.” I mean WOW, how do I not continue on with the next film?”
RB – Immigration was the first main theme of your released films, then you moved to exposing the liberal media and then a more in depth look at Obama’s transformation of America earlier this year. Do you have a long term “pattern” or “route” in mind when picking your subjects?
DML – “The media film is called WE RIDE TO DC. And I didn’t plan on making it. About 8-months earlier I was asked by producers if I would provide an exclusive to The Kelly File. Meaning, I would appear only on Megyn’s show and to go out and shoot the sort of eye-opening video my films offer. I agreed to try it, and in doing so I was exposed to various events, and I captured so much on camera. I also got a real look at the media, and the bias that exists within it.”
Kevin Jackson is a nationally recognized rising star among young conservative thinkers, writers, and political commentators. A Fellow at the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics, he’s a highly sought-after speaker offering a rare blend of intellect and humor.
Kevin is a father, author, and conservative talk-radio host of “The Black Sphere” heard here on Red Nation Rising. He’s authored the bestselling books The BIG Black Lie, and Race Pimping, and takes a no holds barred approach to politics and current race relations in this country.
RB – As we got older, we saw that others have control over our jobs and lives. Character started to matter more, but we’re constantly pulled back to race. Why is that?
KJ – “I’m not sure, but the problem with life is control. When we control our destiny, government is small and relatively meaningless in our lives. When we work for others, we find government growing, and a bigger part (a nuisance) in our lives. This is why government hates entrepreneurs, ergo small business. They act like they like it, but they don’t. Government like big business, as they are (1) too big to fail, and (2) easier to extort. Business in America is no longer about capitalism and free enterprise, but about social engineering for the “greater good.”
RB – Society is more and more at a racial crossroads like we haven’t seen in 50 years. People who aren’t even racist are confronted with making daily judgments, possibly decisions, based on situations of race which… affects them. What responsibility do leaders like Obama, Holder, Reid and others bear for the current distrust, violence and growing problems?
KJ – “First, Obama, et al are not leaders. These people are charlatans of the highest order. Obama could have quelled racial tension early on by telling black Liberals that his election doesn’t allow for lawlessness. That blacks will be expected to be BETTER, and he will provide the inspiration and tools for such. Instead, he gave black Liberals a pass, and they have taken it. More ignorance today in the black community than in a decade of the 1950s. Lawlessness, Godlessness, combined with little to no initiative to better oneself. The least safest place for a black baby is in a black woman’s womb, and the least safe place for black people is around other black people.”
RB – Do the “reverends” Jackson and Sharpton diminish the connection between a good productive life and the perception or the role of the church?
KJ – “Those two have hurt the church, but not enough to say they destroyed religion in blacks. That said, black people are not nearly as religious as we once were. Black Liberals are religious frauds. They go to church, but ignore the teachings of the Bible, and denigrate themselves, ergo God.”
Erik Rush is a Columnist and speaker, FOX Contributor and Author – “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal ~ America’s Racial Obsession,”
RB – What do you suggest and how do you feel about our REAL short and long term future as a free country, economic powerhouse in the world, and a beacon for real growth and potential?
ER – “Being a person of faith, I have to remind myself and others that all this isn’t ultimately in our hands. That said, I think that things will continue to decline as long as this administration [Obama] is in power. Unless we come to a realization as a nation that the policies of the left are singularly destructive and reverse course, it will continue even beyond that. If Obama and the soft socialists in our government (some of whom are in the GOP, by the way) are allowed to continue this evolution toward their oligarchical collectivist model, then America’s days as a dominant economic concern are over.”
RB – [asked in 2013] Is the role of government in our “personal” lives reaching the point of overbearing and therefore hampering the quality of life in our country and the real state of the union?
ER – “Absolutely; it has been increasing incrementally for decades as we gravitate (regress) away from a model of governance, toward a model of ruling. The Founders knew that it was the nature of government to behave in this manner; that’s why they put provisions in the Constitution to prevent it. Through abysmal education and propaganda, the political left has succeeded in removing, ignoring, or superseding those provisions because the public no longer knows any better.’
Throughout my talks with political leaders, authors and media pundits, there are always overwhelming themes of patriotism, religion and true concern and caring for our country.
As a country we’ll survive but without the rule of law, reason and truth we’ll travel the path of other civilizations that have given up on reality and chosen tyranny, socialism and lies.
When you turn on the lights, the roaches scatter. But some will stand and fight, willing to be exposed because they don’t care and in fact even love a good confrontation.
In the old days, we heard of smoked filled back room deals, people behind the scenes, foreign involvements, Communists running rampant in Hollywood and in general an underbelly of sedition, even treason winding through our society.
But now it’s fashionable, it’s in the light, out in the open, above board, even boasted and blatant. Those who seek to disrupt society and even bring down this country open store fronts, put up fancy websites with glowing verbiage of hope and trust, call themselves fancy compassionate names and proclaim to work for the betterment of the downtrodden, the underprivileged, the disadvantaged, the unjustly served masses of humanity.
SIGN THE ACLJ Petition to file legal paperwork and to stop this Obama treason.
This openness is not only arrogant, but encouragement. A promotion and endorsement of acts illegal, controversial, subversive, ignored and usually even forgiven. The truths of life are no longer truth but targets, challenges to get away with anything you can for personal back room profits or agenda driven purposes.
The most immediate and relevant revelation of this concept is the recent activities surrounding the election and the General Flynn affair. People think nothing of running down their coworkers, exposing secrets, cheating debates and stealing the soul of a process or the public.
The acts of Hillary’s emails, the openness of “nothing wrong,” ignorance, and forgiving transgressions which in fact could and still might have devastating effects on our country should be appalling. The crime is no longer important, it’s the revelation of the crime that is the crime. When Podesta writes disparaging remakes about his team, and his boss, the act of disrespect and dissidence is not the issue, but the fact that someone released their private information – no matter what its contents or intent.
The scenario of General Flynn’s unfounded, unproven, (and irrelevant) transgressions proves another point. Not only to expose an opponent, to bring out the possible worst in a new president and his choices, but the willingness to blatantly break the law and put the country at further risk.
The actual act of listening in, recording, documenting and archiving Americans’ private lives was exposed by Edward Snowden. The power overreach of governmental agencies has become more and more in focus over the few years as we see photos of the $1.7B Utah based data complexes, we get information that should be reserved for a few, not a few million, and we see how that info is used and abused.
While Flynn was probably not targeted as an ordinary citizen before reentering governmental service, he was caught up when the FBI, CIA, NSA, DEA, DHS, or some alphabet group monitored Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. All governments know this activity goes on but the question of who, when, from where and how much is not always understood.
The fallacy of some Obama hangover who leaked VERY sensitive communication for obviously political purpose is not just a problem exposing Flynn, but a furtherance of the hatred the CIA has for Flynn given his criticisms and an indication of the length that traitors will go to defeat us. And a reaffirmation of the long term goals of an anti-American socialist.
It also exposes the presence, length and depth of our capabilities to foreign governments which have since started to dump cell phones, rewire offices, change out email servers and check previous methods of communication for fear of further discovery.
And action such as this are all part of a larger scheme – the shadow government of B Hussein Obama, who sees himself as the ongoing patriarch of social change for the world. This narcissistic ambassador of ACORN, the SDS and Alinski school of progressive thought and social justice feels above any rule of law prohibiting restricted activities especially after leaving the oval office. He continues his pursuit of ultimate control, legitimacy and historical relevance.
We know that during his reign, the IRS was used against political enemies of the state, the perceived political opponents and conservative groups attempting to further freedom and right. Even reporter James Rosen AND his parents were brought under the boot of investigation. Yes, Americans are at risk for retribution and destruction from the underlying, hidden activities of the shadow government.
Devin Nunes, Republican chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, says that he saw the leaks about Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak as part of a pattern. “There does appear to be a well-orchestrated effort to attack Flynn and others in the administration,” he said. “From the leaking of phone calls between the president and foreign leaders to what appears to be high-level FISA Court information, to the leaking of American citizens being denied security clearances, it looks like a pattern.”
When the president can’t be sure of who’s listening, when officials can’t have a confidence of privacy from their own administration’s activities, when holdover agitators and dissidents from previous admins are inclined to bring down a president and his people for personal or political purposes, the concept of a renegade government behind the scenes isn’t any longer obscured by a smoke filled environment.
Our country is at risk, as the subversives don’t always wear a Russian ushanka or wave a black and white ISIS flag. They wear suits, they run organizations called OFA, they steal us blind through retirement plans, union donations, agency contributions and captured secret emails and phone calls.
President Trump needs to immediately open an investigation. The number of people with high level access to intercepts and recordings can’t be that large and they could quickly determine who, when, and how- we know the why. Then a quick trial and a public hanging for traitors of the republic. Hey, we used to do it when we were far less sophisticated and at risk.
It’s a shame we all have to live with a constant look over our shoulder for the shadow behind us but the destructors don’t always work in the light and the unprepared vicar can become the unfortunate victim.
A reminder – Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.
Baltimore, Ferguson, NYC, Chicago were the combat zones of the past – Is America the future battleground?
Trump’s desire to change America is already creating battles.
After that November 9th morning when the final numbers came in and Trump won the final states, he had a view of the country, but did he see the real battles brewing?
Some say Donald Trump was destined to lead, to make a difference, to correct years of corruption, deceit, inefficiency, hatred and rioting; to put the ship of state on a new, productive course. But the battle is not just the past. It’s the future.
It’s tough enough to fight world problems, keep us safe in good times, develop a plan to bring back our economy and do all the things required to put the right people in place. But when you’re also fighting a deliberate force that is out to destroy America…. it only adds to the fray and wastes time – and people.
Being a businessman instead of a politician, Trump is accustomed to fighting competition, but not subversion. Dealing with corruption and building codes has its own challenges, but fighting against thousands trained to disrupt your efforts, fighting against anti-American forces, pushing back against groups determined to make sure you’re a failure in your patriotic direction is a whole new game.
Trump knows and practices reason. But groups bent on bringing down America at any cost, ranting, raving and rioting thugs creating chaos are not productive but a calamitous, pernicious force in need of banishment on a grand scale.
If you thought that president B Hussein was out of office, you were wrong. He’s only moved down the street; his presence, influence and goals still evident through the thousands he’s training to bring his message of hate for America to the streets.
His group, Organizing for Action, is a movement for violence, rioting, destruction. Their motto is “Organizing for Action is a movement of millions of Americans, coming together to fight for real, lasting change.” when in fact it should be “Organizing for Action is a movement of millions of Americans, coming together to fight.” And don’t think otherwise. They purport to come in peace wanting nothing more than equality, opportunity and fairness. [Visit their site and count the number of times “fight” is used. Not “work toward,” “develop,” “improve,” or “create,” but fight.]
If you think about it, OFA, Organizing for America could have a positive inclination, but when you “Organize for Action” and you’re an Alinsky socialist, gang of community organizers directed to cause property damage, personal injury, possibly deaths, to disrupt the message of growth, productive and positive goals, your agenda is not good for anyone except yourselves – and your minions of mistrust, marchers of maliciousness, and directors of disorder.
OFA says “That kind of progress is never easy. But we’re not here for the easy fights.” Again, the word “fights” has diverse meaning because they have already trained through organized, hands-on courses THOUSANDS of people – teaching them how to organize, how to demonstrate to disrupt and be the opposition of truth and reason. Yes, Alinsky is alive and well and living in the dimly lit cracks and crevices of OFA offices.
New courses set for March have another 25,000 lined up for training and indoctrination. They boast 250 local chapters and claim 5,000,000 leftist lemmings “who’ve taken action with OFA as part of a long line of people who stand up and take on the big fights for social justice,” They proclaim “We aren’t the first to fight for progressive change and we won’t be the last.” [again, “fight fight fight.”]
The roots of a blatant, conscious and intentional chaotic firestorm of social power began with the anti-establishment advocates of long ago. If you think that black vs white, rich vs poor, socialists vs capitalists, peace vs. civil unrest are in remission and are either in the past or the very far distant future – you’re mistaken. The undercurrent of violence, racism, fascism and anarchy are just around the corner. And B. Hussein and traitor G. Soros have their fingerprints on every aspect of the force being culled and advanced to bring down America.
The erroneously justified battles of race, income, welfare, justice, equality are being waged against reasonable people who just seek to live their lives, work hard and raise their families, enjoy normalcy. But for the progressives, it’s an ongoing agenda of hate and disparagement, criticism and calamity fought on the battlefields of American streets occupied with black power brokers like the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, and groups of ACORN, Socialists, and anarchical advancement.
It’s not a discussion of reasonable people seeking answers to right vs. wrong vs. alternatives, but a push back on law and order, an ignorance of reason and appropriateness. People with too much free time supported by people with too much money and a will to disperse it across the violent landscape of social justice.
Trump knows how to build a building. Can he rebuild a country? He appears to have the best of intentions to bring back our freedoms, our economy, our value and worth as the greatest country in the history of the world – but is he prepared and willing to fight a much bigger, bloodier battle… the personal and national survival of right, reason and righteousness?
2017 may tell us.
Well, it is no secret Nordstrom recently dropped Ivanka Tump’s line from their stores, but was it the right move? Liberals claiming to shop at the department store started a nationwide campaign for Nordstrom to drop the brand, though, at first, Nordstrom seemed to be holding its stance and not choosing a side. However, after pressure applied via social media, Nordstrom folded and stated they were dropping Ivanka’s line due to sales.
Now could it be true? Sure, but let’s be real, there are a few brands at Nordstrom that could have also received the boot that did not. Unfortunately, when you side with a group that is very good at claiming to be victimized by something so simple, you can’t predict their next target. Just a couple days ago Nordstrom announced its nonprofit partner for 2017, YWCAUSA.
YWCAUSA mission statement:
- We seek to increase the equal protections and equal opportunities of people of color.
- We work to increase economic opportunities for women and girls of color, recognizing the importance of addressing the race and gender inequities that exist for this historically and contemporarily marginalized community.
- We strive to improve the often disproportionately negative health and safety outcomes for women and girls of color by making sure they have access to high-quality health and safety resources and support systems.
Interesting, drop the President’s daughter, and then announce partner that could be considered anti-Trump. YWCAUSA tweets almost hourly about how much they despise everything the Trump administration is doing, right down to his choice in cabinet members.
Lets be honest, staying quiet and not choosing a side until the storm passed would have had an effect on sales for maybe a month, if that, who knows if those boycotting actually shopped at the department store? Today’s protestors move with the so called movement, so the next target is a trendy tweet away. I believe Nordstrom made two mistakes. Mistake one, whomever orchestrated the boycott have made Nordstrom their donkey. At any point, they can claim Nordstrom is discriminating against customers or not hiring enough black people and begin a boycott tomorrow. Keep in mind Al Sharpton made a career out of pulling the race card against corporations, ask Macy’s. Mistake two, those not looking to shop somewhere that gets involved in politics, and of course Trump supporters, will walk away. Might I mention, depending on Ivanka’s contract with Nordstrom, if she finds that she was dropped due to boycott, as a woman, she too could claim discrimination and file a lawsuit.
In a nutshell, Nordstrom better pray they made the right choice, oh wait, they chose the side that doesn’t get involved in prayer.
A Litany Of ER Abuses
In a recent column, I discussed the forthcoming closure of the Cook Medical Center ER and why it shouldn’t be happening. Unexpectedly, at least to me, that column appears to have gone “viral.” Of the tens of thousands of people reached, surprisingly, I received only three negative responses – all of which I found rather amusing. One person referred to me as “anti-Christian” (really?). Another stated that “grouping people into groups” was wrong (self-explanatory). And, yet, a third explained how aghast she became when she discovered that her primary care physician required payment for service (the nerve!).
In spite of the negative tone, these comments offered something beyond mere entertainment value – that is, proof that with regard to the dire circumstances facing Georgia’s and America’s ERs, some people just don’t get it. So, in response to these misinformed types, I gladly offer a few examples for purposes of enlightenment. If you are a taxpayer, prepare to be angry.
I once had a patient present to the ER complaining of “stiff hair” (I’m not making this up). It turns out, she had placed a straightener on her hair and, later that night, around 1:00AM, showed up asking if we had something that would remove the straightener – and all at taxpayer expense.
“Baby’s first picture” is a common scam. It works this way – young pregnant females wait until around 20 weeks gestation. Then, they call 911 complaining of pelvic pain and leaking fluid (which, of course, is a fabrication). This gets them a free ride to the ER and a complete work-up including trans-abdominal ultrasound during which the ultrasonographer captures images of the developing fetus for the medical record. The patient then asks for copies of these images which she later displays to her friends and family as “baby’s first picture” – and all at taxpayer expense.
For many years, the most shoplifted items in America were home pregnancy tests, that is, until these shoplifters discovered they could acquire them for free at ERs. So, nowadays, the scenario goes like this…Patient: “I’m eight weeks pregnant and I need a pregnancy test.” Triage nurse: “Have you been to your doctor for an exam?” Patient: “No, I need a pregnancy test first so I can get my Medicaid started.” Nurse: “Have you taken a home pregnancy test?” Patient: “No, I don’t have the money,” after which she gets a free pregnancy test – and all at taxpayer expense.
Opiate addicts frequent ERs complaining of various pain syndromes in attempts to acquire prescriptions for narcotics. A common scam follows: an addict presents complaining of flank pain from kidney stones because he knows the treatment often includes narcotics. The doctor orders a urinalysis to evaluate for the presence of blood in the urine – no blood often means no kidney stones which often means no narcotic prescription. Of course, the addict knows this and comes prepared – he has acquired a lancet from a diabetic relative or friend and, when he goes into the bathroom to provide a urine sample, he pricks his finger with the lancet, sticks his finger into the sample and, voila, blood in the urine which likely means a prescription for narcotics – and all at taxpayer expense.
For additional perspective, consider an all too common scenario: A patient with a history of high blood pressure and diabetes calls 911 at 2:00AM complaining of right knee pain. He gives these answers to the following questions: How long has your knee been hurting? “Three months.” What have you taken for pain? “Nothing.” Did you injure your knee at work? “I don’t work.” Have you seen your doctor about your knee pain? “I ain’t got no doctor.” Who writes your prescriptions for your blood pressure and diabetes medication? “I go to the ER.” How will you get home when we are finished? “My family, they’re in the lobby” (having followed the ambulance to the hospital). So he gets an x-ray, is diagnosed with mild osteoarthritis (which, of course, isn’t an emergency and doesn’t justify ambulance transport), receives an injection for pain and a prescription, and goes on his way – and all at taxpayer expense.
Ah, and the ER scams go on and on and on…the person who calls 911 complaining of chest pain in order to get a ride to town; the alcoholic who drank his enter Social Security check and comes to the ER to get medication to manage his withdrawal symptoms; the weekend partier who presents on Sunday night seeking a work excuse in anticipation of a Monday morning hangover; members of the Friday Night Gun and Knife Club who shoot and stab each other over real or perceived slights and then get dropped off by friends in the ER parking lot or ambulance bay; the Sunday lunch crowd who, amazingly, never seem to get sick during church services but somehow manage to become acutely ill at the conclusion of the sermon; and the people who visit the ER instead of their doctor because their doctor charges a co-pay or they just don’t have time to make an appointment or they just don’t like waiting in the doctor’s office or whatever, whatever, whatever – and all at taxpayer expense.
The alternative right, more commonly known as the alt right, is a far right ideology that rejects traditional ideas of American conservatism. The self-proclaimed focus of the alt right is the preservation of the white race and “white” countries. The alt right is regularly criticized for derogatory slurs towards Jewish people, minorities, mixed race couples, and others. The philosophy of the Alt-right is connected to fascism and Nazism as a result of their flagrant support for Hitler and astounding denial of the Holocaust.
The Alt-right is pernicious to the Republican Party because they provide ammunition for leftists to brand conservative Americans as racist and bigoted. These labels are quite fitting for the Alt-right, but not for conservative men and women in this great nation. The Republican Party is the party of principles, patriotism, and innovation; the Alt-right morphs principles into exclusion, patriotism into discrimination, and innovation into regression. Followers of the Alt-right have boldly expressed their feelings of disdain for non white Americans. One woman even went as far as to state that she wants “non-whites” to be dead. This is NOT what conservatism represents. This is NOT what the Republican Party stands for. The dogma of the Alt-right is insidious and evil. President Trump disavowed the Alt-right, stating that they are not a group that he wants to energize.
The most ironic aspect of the Alt-right is their proclaimed loathing for social justice warriors. The Alt-right is the right wing, mirror image of social justice warriors. Like a plethora of other racists and fascists, the Alt-right is the embodiment of their supposed opposition. Social justice warriors and the Alt-right both judge people based on exterior qualities such as race. An interesting theory known as the horseshoe theory is applicable between social justice warriors and the Alt-right. The horseshoe theory states that the far left and far right are actually identical, rather than polar opposites, as most would believe them to be. This notion holds true. Communism and fascism are considered to be on opposing sides of the political spectrum, yet when you study both regimes, you discover the overwhelming amount of parallels between them. Familiarity truly does breed contempt.
America must know that Alt-right values are dissimilar and contrasting to conservative ones. Conservatives do not engage in divisive and race baiting tactics. As a woman of color, I am conservative because the ideology coincides with who I am. I support small government, low taxes, legal immigration, and the value of American grit over welfare. Any American can succeed as long as he or she is willing to work for it. Each American must decide to make something of themselves. The Alt-right believes that success and greatness belongs to one group. Alt-right doctrines are NOT synonymous to Republicans or conservatives, which is why they are the alternativeright.
We are a Red Nation Rising of Centrists, Conservatives and Libertarians uniting to the right for Civics & Constitutionalism! From one single Tweet to one BILLION Grassroots, Organic Social Media Impressions per month, Red Nation Rising™ is an Internet phenomenon which has transitioned to a serious, national, grassroots organization.
Every year it seems the left comes up with a buzz word or two to act as if the problem isn’t what we all know it to be.
For instance, Police Reform places blame on the police for all criminal behavior. Stating because the police do not have a better relationship with the community, there is a ton of crime and killings. I don’t even think my 9 year old stepdaughter would buy this insertion. A lot of this starts at home. A good upbringing and family structure goes a long way. Did you know 78% of high school dropouts are raised in a home where the father is absent? Notice I did not say black homes? This is not a race issue, this is a daddy issue.
According to the National Fatherhood Initiative, those from a fatherless home are more likely to go to prison, more likely to abuse alcohol and drugs, 7 times more likely to become pregnant as a teen, more likely to commit a crime, and the list of negatives go on. So it isn’t surprising that in a predominantly black community, so much crime is taking place. 79% of black children live in a fatherless home. It isn’t rocket science, its just not what people want to hear. Democrats like to cater to feelings, and the general feeling is there must be someone to blame. So who is taking the wrap? Not the fathers abandoning their children, the police.
Don’t get me wrong, there are some strong single mothers keeping their children on the straight and narrow. There are some mothers working 3 jobs to make ends meet, and just can’t possibly keep a watchful eye at all times. Of course, there a few that could just care less and love the fact that they can blame others for their poor parenting. My question, do the police need reform? Or do Police Commissioners need to be held responsible for their “bad apples”? I guarantee if you told a chief his job is on the line for any hate crime committed by any officer on their force, we would see a drastic change. Should police make an effort to build a trusting relationship with the residents on their beat? Absolutely, so many more cases would be solved. But to send police into communities to build these relationships without respect for their lives, well in some areas, that is downright dangerous. Respect for our men and women in blue is at an all time low. Perhaps we should build a trusting relationship on both ends.
Please follow me on Twitter, @kimKBaltimore
NOT HAPPENING IN AMERICA!
We’ve learned over time that America is accepting in that the voice of dissent is welcome, even encouraged for shared discussions. Exchanges of bettering society, expressing our views on opposing ideas and actions and bringing to light the alternative ways of living. Shared debate over the positives and negatives of any subject from military intervention to local school board appointments.
In war time, there are those who want American forces to stay out of foreign affairs and protect us here. And in years past, there were those who marched in peaceful expression of social values with “love beads and flowers” the accouterments of the day.
But let’s face facts. It’s no longer just the expression of thought, but the obliteration of your opponent; the annihilation of opposing view which is most important and, part of all that is the growing need to make your statement with violence and destruction.
Not content to just sing in peaceful unison, carrying a sign and waving an American flag, now it’s incumbent on the participants (or social warriors if you will) to destroy. The American symbol of freedom has become fuel for ferocity, encouraging the ruin of public and private property, instigation of physical violence against those who oppose, to light fires, loot, use private and police vehicles as a platform of your appearance, and yes…make the biggest and brightest statement possible to…… well, not just to express but to “activate.”
Isn’t it wonderful that whenever a “spontaneous” group expression breaks out, there must be a print shop nearby to print up all those nice-looking signs? Or, as in the announcement of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, you bring your generic graphic poster and then fill in the last minute name of the target of your protest as it’s announced – how efficient can we get.
Deaths are not only the “motive du jour” but the result of misguided participants who feel guns are appropriate trappings for the exciting get-together. Justin Carr was the victim at the Charlotte, NC when crowds felt it necessary to act without thinking, march and destroy without consideration of the true consequences of their irresponsibility.
Riots against candidate Trump in Chicago were not voices of disagreement, but planned, paid for uprisings of insurrection. Protests of rebellion compensated for by those with the money to support those with the time to show up and cause of unrest.
The art of rioting and protesting isn’t just making a statement, exercising freedom of disagreement anymore, it’s a sponsored army of insurgents paid for by people with goals far outreaching the purpose at hand. The Soros’ of the world delight in contributing millions to make their socialistic, fascist, anti-America point in hopes of provocative.
It’s no longer practicable to make a statement of dissension, but fashionable to turn an opinion into an opportunity for insurgency, chaos and anarchy.
- A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
- Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
As the colors of pride and acceptance light the background, the fire of destruction illuminates the Berkeley battleground of discord. In the recent campus disturbance, students, teachers and outsiders were allowed to run rampant leaving the campus’ guest speaker (someone with opposing, non-violent verbal views of their own) to fend for himself without benefit of police authority to dispel the destruction. Fires, rocks thrown through windows, barriers destroyed and… only one arrest to show some minor presence of law.
Whine anyone? For those of us who have been around a while, we remember the America of the 50’s and 60’s when our families were relaxed. Our lives were simple and the biggest decisions of the week were “who’s coming over for dinner after church on Sunday” or “who am I going to the movies with Saturday night.”
But now America has changed. The world has changed. People have changed.
People in general were concerned and worked toward relationships, family and friends. Even when times were tough, we cared about each other and enjoyed a happy and optimistic feeling in life. BUT NOW…. People are involved with movements, concerned and working toward agendas and causes, and there’s a feeling of negativity and worry – especially the last eight years.
I mean really… in the 50’s and 60’s the biggest thing was practicing storm and air raid drills in the Quonset hut we used for school. The last few years we hear about the government buying coffins and guillotines by the dozens and trains with chains for transporting political prisoners. True or not, it’s part of internet news.
And who hasn’t been exposed to the massive reporting of FEMA camps to house us “deplorables” when the time comes AFTER they’ve taken all our guns away. America has made it through bad money times before as we saw in ’06 – ‘10. But it was the social upheaval, distrust and social propaganda that fostered the fear of obliteration.
And the worst thing is the change in people. Whiny whiny people. Supported with seemingly unlimited sources of manipulative money from the depths of social hell that comes pouring in from donors like Soros, a Jewish traitor against his own people, who is set to destroy America by any means. And his accomplices are the whining uninformed, the easily led, the uneducated, the lazy and those in need of social causes and personal acceptance.
Actors have become activists. Politicians have become puppets. The lazy have become the led, and the wimpy are the willing in the fight for….. well, they’re not really sure.
All they know is that they are expected – or paid – to WHINE. Cry about this and that, make a scene, disrupt society, complain and grumble about how bad things are… for themselves and everyone.
Women whine about free birth control, people who can’t even spell Muslim are worried about their extinction because they aren’t allowed in the country till they are vetted. They want to occupy Wall Street, Main Street, or any college space that will allow them searching for their cause, their play-dough, cuddly puppies and caring candles.
Our leaders are whining and crying in public with compassionate crocodile tears of understanding to garner support from those gullible groups bent on “belonging” and overly willing to be led somewhere…anywhere.
Popular musicians and the elite portray themselves as societal spokesmen of sympathy to make a point and show how bad America is, how unstable Trump is, how unreasonable our governmental actions are – even though there is an attempt to save this country from itself, to protect us from evil, to control our destiny and not leave it to the whims of destructors willing to invade and attack us.
Remember when your mom would say “stop whining?” Where are these people’s mother now? At least we probably had something to whine about but we weren’t out to get more free stuff, protect people who hate us while blindly following the dictates of deceit.
We’re overrun with the media, Hollywood, politicians, community organizers and social agenda ACLUs. You can’t swing a democrat or dead cat in a room without hitting someone wanting to control your life, gain your participation to change the world to their definition of decency and acceptance. Everywhere they go it’s a stage to spout their ridiculous rhetoric of disorder.
They whine and complain about things that haven’t even happened yet, and promise with their dying breath to leave the country rather than stay and be a contributing counterpart to help but alas…. Elections come and go and they’re still here….. if only to buy a few more Guccis or savor sushi at Urasawa.
We whine about the way we’re being treated and we’re deplorable, racist and petty. They whine and crowds gather for the fracas and freebies.
When will America grow up again? When will America again become a land of self-sufficient, responsible productive citizens wanting to help, not hinder; contribute not conspire; improve not impair?
I wonder if Orson Welles meant to say “We will have no whine before its time?” Probably not.
Truth – it’s such a fleeting thing when people choose to ignore, deny or twist it. And yet… truth, in its “truest” form, is fact. It’s been defined as:
- The quality or state of being true.
- That which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
- A fact or belief that is accepted as true.
For many of us, speaking the truth, promoting the truth, living the truth day to day is a part of life, if not a passion. And certainly, it has its benefits.
In the world of politics, telling the truth – calling it what “it” is – is paramount to the act of communicating correctly to those you wish to lead. Unless of course you choose to lie deliberately for the purpose to mislead, manipulate, deceive or confuse for personal gain.
And when you’re caught bypassing the truth, skimming over it like a pothole in a better path, people might call you out on it. Calling a spade a spade, as it were, to make it known “your truth” is not reality, not based on fact.
Whoops… was I racist there? Did I interject a pejorative indented to bespeak hate and degradation for a particular group? NO, I think not. Again, the truth of the phrase has its meaning far before the modern implications assigned by those who would choose and promote it as a venomous means of bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination. And there’s a lesson to be learned in all this.
If you read even early American writing, you see that people spoke in relative simple terms, easy to understand ideas so as NOT to be misunderstood. So, when saying a rock “is” a rock, a tree “is” a tree, a spade “is” a spade, then those are facts and not to be disputed; as used by Oscar Wilde in “The Importance of Being Earnest”, in 1895:
“Do you suggest, Miss Fairfax, that I entrapped Ernest into an engagement? How dare you? This is no time for wearing the shallow mask of manners. When I see a spade I call it a spade.”
And Gwendolen’s response to Cecily could, or might, certainly be reinterpreted in our “modern society”
“I am glad to say that I have never seen a spade. It is obvious that our social spheres have been widely different.”
Languages are always changing, adapting to their time and place and yet, socially changing the meaning of a word or phrase can have unintended (or intended), alarming and deleterious consequences. It was in the early 20th century that a more racial tone was ascribed to this particular phrase.
Why bring up this history lesson? Because in today’s political arena, the lions have been having the masses of citizenry for lunch with their verbal banter. Garnering support from those with no individual intellect to understand “truth”, no desire to seek wisdom or capacity to realize they are sheep on the flower laden path to their own destruction. Promoting some to riot, destroy, even kill. Lemmings of the left.
Over the last eight years there were so many lies told by our “leaders” (to use the term very loosely) that “keeping your doctor or your plan” was in no way related to being a spade. When the president said, there wasn’t “a hint of scandal”, there were no garden tools of honesty and reality in that statement.
And yet for eight long, misleading years, a lot of people either ignored or bought into the lies, the deceptions, the corruption of verbal abuse spewed on them, as long as it met their daily needs of rent checks, free this and that and personal mental security.
It’s incumbent on all of us to be aware, to listen and discern what is being told to us for our own good and stable futures. People are human and make mistakes, and even President Trump will falter and stumble as have all the great leaders but…. and this is a HUGE but…. there must be a realization and questioning – Was it a mistake or an attempt to present that mere rusty spade as a golden rod, or maybe a true warning of a tough pill to swallow for our own good. Is the misspoken truth meant to deceive, or accidental?
As participants in our society, we must take a more educated role in the management of our country by electing hard working, qualified and truthful leaders. We must vote on issues with all the facts on the table. And not being misled and distracted by all the chocolate covered or gold plated carrots of promise that are dangled every 2 or 4 years for our amusement and enjoyment.
Is a spade a spade? Usually. Because truth is truth, facts are facts as in the old adage, “You’re either pregnant or you’re not.” There’s no in-between when it comes to keeping your doctor or finding a scandal…. or realizing the true reality of your future.
In considering truth, I would leave you this admonition from Geoffrey Chaucer in “The Cook’s Tale”, 1390:
“But yet I pray thee be not wroth for game; A man may say full sooth [the truth] in game and play.“
Or Shakespeare later came closer to our contemporary version of the expression in “King Lear”, 1605:
“Many a true word hath been spoken in jest.”
Are we getting the truth? Are we really hearing and understanding the truth? Or is it wrapped in a joke or a lie? Could it be an “inconvenient truth?”
Discern carefully my friends, and be warned.
For Georgia and America to rescue their failing rural emergency rooms, state and federal legislators, hospital administrators, emergency medicine physicians, nurses, ancillary medical staff, patients, and the public at large must first come to terms with several simple and unavoidable truths:
1) Rural ERs are being abused by non-payers, drug-seekers, those looking for a work excuse or a free pregnancy test, and those who have no idea what the true purpose of an ER is.
2) Those in a position to do something about these problems aren’t doing anything meaningful about these problems.
3) Hospitals – even those listed as not-for-profit – are businesses, not charity organizations, and any hospital that is operated as a charity rather than a business will eventually fail (well, except maybe St. Jude’s).
4) Emergency physicians who refill maintenance medications including narcotics are partially to blame.
5) Malpractice lawyers aren’t to blame but social security and disability lawyers who encourage clients to visit emergency rooms to enhance their chances of a successful claim are partially to blame.
6) Most important, health care is not a right, rather, it is a personal responsibility.
For those who disagree, I invite you to pull a 24-hour shift with me in a rural ER to see for yourself. Unlike deluded Hollywood celebrities and disgruntled second-string NFL players grasping for their last 15 minutes of fame, my comments are based not upon something I heard at a party or read in Salon Magazine but, rather, on real-life, day-to-day (and night-to-night for that matter) experiences during the thousands of hours I’ve spent working as an emergency physician in several of Georgia’s rural ERs during the last nearly 20 years.
Working in a rural ER has an upside – saving a life, easing someone’s pain, making a sick child feel better. But there is a dark side, too, and only those who work in emergency medicine fully understand what I mean. There are those in society who want something for nothing, who demand much from the system but offer little or nothing in return, who believe the world owes them a living, and who accept no personal responsibility for their actions…and these people, it seems, frequent rural ERs in droves. The problem, at least from a policy standpoint, is that due to the insular and private nature of medicine in general, and emergency medicine in particular, the general public has little or no awareness of the abuse – if they did, they’d be outraged. To put the situation into financial perspective, every time you write that check to pay your exorbitant medical insurance premium, just know that you are paying for your own coverage and that of 8 or 10 other people you don’t even know.
To be sure, the problem is multi-factorial, as the above list attests. However, the most fundamental issue leading to the financial failure of rural ERs and hospitals is the leftist notion that health care is a right. For decades, beginning with President Roosevelt’s pre-World War II implementation of John Maynard Keynes hair-brained economic theories to the post-World War II influx of European socialists, those on the Left have attempted to indoctrinate Americans into believing all personal needs could be, and should be, met by the government. That led eventually to President Johnson’s colossal failure known as the “Great Society” program and recently culminated in President Obama’s $20 trillion dollar national debt attributable mostly to the massive expansion of Medicaid and the food stamp program.
In fact, people have no more of a right to demand that someone else provide them with medical coverage than they have a right to fill a buggy with merchandise at Wal-Mart and walk out without paying or to demand their next door neighbor mow their lawn for them while sitting on their front porch drinking sweet tea. Until this segment of society finally comes to understand that health care isn’t a right but is an individual responsibility, rural ERs will continue to be abused and, as a result, will continue to fail.
Tift Regional Health Center recently announced that its affiliate, Cook Medical Center in Adel, will close its emergency department next month. This action will leave the citizens of Adel and Cook County without immediate access to emergency department services. And it didn’t have to happen.
The reason for the forthcoming closure isn’t mismanagement on the part of administration or declining utilization or even a bad economy. The reason, actually, is a dirty little secret that the general public isn’t aware of and that those on the Left refuse to acknowledge…overutilization of emergency services by “self-pay” patients. Why the quotation marks around the term “self-pay?” Because, in the medical community, self-pay is a euphemism for “no-pay” as the vast majority of self-pay patients ultimately don’t pay their medical bills.
How do I know this? Because I am an emergency medicine physician and I once practiced in the emergency department at Cook Medical Center. While working there, I noted that the administrative and medical staff were excellent – caring, capable, and committed to patient care. Adel and Cook County, it seemed, had a good thing going with regard to its emergency department. But it was doomed, and I knew it. It was only a matter of time, and I said so, often. And now that time has come.
In addition to practicing medicine, I hold an MBA in management/finance and I can attest to the fact that there is no such thing as a successful business model in which a business loses more in revenue than it earns. That applies to hospitals as well – yet another fact the Left refuses to accept.
During my first shift at Cook, I treated a patient who had been to the ER 63 times that year already – it was only March – and he never paid a dime. On several occasions, he made multiple visits to the ER in the same day – on one occasion, six visits in 24 hours, all by ambulance. His objective, which he readily explained to me after I questioned the frequency of his visits, was that he had applied for disability and was told he was more likely to win his case if he had multiple ER visits in his medical record. When I brought this up to administration, I received the universal palms up sign along with the statement, “There is nothing we can do.”
A simple, if only partial, solution to this problem is known as a medical screening examination (MSE) in which patients are evaluated by the ER physician and if their complaints are deemed non-emergent, these patients are referred to their primary care provider or local clinic. In this regard, most hospital administrators are at fault for not establishing MSE programs due, they argue, to concerns over litigation.
The other dirty little secret is that federal and state lawmakers could pass legislation to correct these abuses but choose not to in an effort to avoid being seen as insensitive. By implication, these legislators would prefer a rural hospital close and deny services to an entire community rather than run the risk of being seen as denying coverage to a certain segment of the population – that is, the no-payers.
Maybe when all of Georgia’s rural hospitals close, legislators will finally heed the call to real action. My impression, based upon experience, is that this is merely wishful thinking. The recent effort to solve the financial shortfall by offering tax incentives to encourage businesses to donate money to rural hospitals, though well-intentioned, has little to no chance of succeeding. Why? Because this plan avoids the fundamental problem of refusing to place responsibility on those responsible – that is, on the no-payers. Don’t believe me? Wait and see. Of course, improved insurance reimbursement rates would help some, but this does nothing to address the reality that rural ERs are being abused and that those in a position to do something about it aren’t doing anything about it. The lack of state and federal leadership with regard to Georgia’s and America’s failing rural hospitals is at best a travesty and, at worst, a dereliction of duty by those holding public legislative office. To save these hospitals requires strength of character on the part of our legislators – that is to say, the strength to tell people when they choose to visit a rural ER that they should be prepared to pay their bill and not expect someone else to pay it for them.
I have never felt prouder to be an American than I was while watching President Donald John Trump be sworn into office. He is a bold, indomitable leader and he will be an exceptional President. President Trump will do what many past Presidents have failed to do and take on the establishment on both sides of the aisle. He will repeal and replace Obamacare and terminate illegal immigration. His Inaugural address was very promising.
One of the first points of his address was removing power from Washington and restoring power to American citizens. This act is crucial for the success of this great nation. History has repeatedly proven that an all powerful government is catastrophic. The government was never created to hold power over the people. When our Founding Fathers wrote the laws of America, they always intended for the citizens to have the power. We the people elect those in office. We the people elect senators to represent us. We are in charge and for so long the American people have elected leaders who did not share this belief. No more.
President Trump went on to discuss the significance of putting Americans first. He talked about the unity of our nation and providing opportunities for all Americans to succeed. We will support the American military, restore America’s borders, and secure the American infrastructure. President Trump will get people off of welfare and put them back to work. This will add to the economy and taxpayers will no longer be forced to pay for those who do not want to work. All of these practices lead to a great and prosperous nation. Our new President will restore wealth, greatness, strength, and prosperity in America. Our new President understands the importance of upholding the law, buying American products, and hiring American people. A nation that puts itself first is a nation that shines and sets a fine example for others.
I admire President Trump’s love for America. His patriotism and support of Americans is exemplary. United we stand, divided we fall. Throughout President Trump’s Inaugural address, he spoke with high energy, vigilance, and passion. His faith in America is evidenced through his bold and positive convictions. President Trump wants what is best for this country. His speech was genuine and came directly from the heart.
It is the beginning of a new era. The Trump years are among us. From this point forward, America will be a country that rewards success and hard work. We, the American people, finally have a President who values our country enough to put our best interests first. I look forward with great anticipation to the changes that will be made.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Written By: Gabrielle Seunagal
We are a Red Nation Rising of Centrists, Conservatives and Libertarians uniting to the right for Civics & Constitutionalism! From one single Tweet to one BILLION Grassroots, Organic Social Media Impressions per month, Red Nation Rising™ is an Internet phenomenon which has transitioned to a serious, national, grassroots organization.
Last Thursday, January 19. at approximately 6 pm cst. seventeen hours before Donald Trump’s Inauguration, Wisconsin’s David Fuller is hanging at home with his cousin Matt. Out of nowhere, Matt says “Hey. Let’s go to D.C. to see Trump sworn in. ROAD TRIP!”
Just like that, David and Matt set off from outside Milwaukee (David as @RNRWisconsin helped turn WI from Blue to Red) to see the transition of power from Blue Dem Obama to America’s President — the man who turned all those counties conservative Red, baby, RED — Donald Trump!
Other than their highway route and an address of a DC Metro train station, these fellas had no plans. Basically, eight hundred (800) miles in the car overnight, park, short train ride, then the one mile walk. Sounds like the Blues Brothers, but they’re conservative red-blooded patriots, all the way. Their mission? Be present for Donald Trump’s Inauguration to witness the rebirth of America.
By midnight our guys were making good time. Six hours plus drive time and these RNR boys had passed Toledo, Ohio. Wisconsin warriors braving the Ohio Turnpike in the formerly blue and now red again Buckeye state.
Oh-Hi-O! A great midwestern state, truly unique in America, Ohio played the pendulum President Trump needed to turn America’s tide from liberal, destructive Blue to positive, conservative Red. He did it. Thus, David and Matt wanted to say, “#ThankYouTrump!”
At 8 am est Friday, January 20th, 2017, David and Matt arrived at the parking garage in the DC area. They readied themselves to reclaim America from the grassroots. On the street in our capitol. Together with hundreds of thousands of other good, decent Americans who caught the Metro D.C. line that morning (that really WAS the #TrumpTrain) they’d cross town and walk a mile to the National Mall.
Were David and Matt photographed from above by the NY Times while they were there? Who cares? The two guys were part of an undeniably large crowd. How large? Well, the total audience set records! The Inauguration of Donald Trump was the largest audience to witness a Presidential Inauguration ever. (Sean Spicer told the truth!) David, a Navy veteran, and his cousin Matt care. That’s why they went.
That day the men canvassed their surroundings for about an hour and a half before making their way past — and giving fist bumps to — the heavy security of military blockades and personnel guarding the area.
With all the helicopters flying above, David felt like he was back in Iraq, fighting a different dictatorial Hussein… Blue Dem Barry. But it was twenty six years after his service in Iraq, and while David will never stop fighting the never ending battle to bring bad regimes to swift end, it was surreal for David to be answering the call — again — to help see good capture bad here in America. David was in Washington, DC for the reclamation of our country.
With his loyal and patriotic cousin Matt, both troops stood ready. They were fully prepared to participate in any further actions needed in defense of Country, Constitution, and Family. To fulfill the oath which NEVER ends.
It got closer to noon, when Trump would be officially sworn in as America’s 45th President. The most powerful man in the world. Meanwhile, on the ground, the Milwaukee Boys ran into quite a group of different types of people also in DC. Of course there was Trump supporters. There was also a dark cult wearing black robes marching to the beat of a single bongo drum led by a head wizard. Plus, women’s rights protesters, BLM, and most every other freak show group you might imagine. All together assembled with David and Matt and other American Patriots. What a battle we are fighting… what a trip!
Presented with the opportunity to engage in person with such characters, David and Matt merged in to watch the event unfold. What a setting to be a part of American history. There on the National Mall, gritting their teeth as the leftist morons jeered a hallmark of our political process, the peaceful transition of power, David and Matt cheered and clapped!
They laughed off the “mean” mugs from the disruptors surrounding them. They cheered even louder. David and Matt stood their ground. Soon, others in the crowd felt inspired to get loud in support of Trump too. It felt nice knowing you were not alone. Because David and Matt refused to back down, because they got louder and louder with their positive messages, others broke their silence and applauded our new President.
Win for the boyos! Win for the Trump supporters in that section and watching at home or work. We are not alone. We have a President. The winning spreads and it’s time us regular folk start piling up victories again.
Matt wore an American flag scarf type thing around his neck with pride that day and night. To the both of them, a new mission emerged. Protect that flag wrapped around Matt’s neck in other sections of the city.
After the Inauguration David and Matt walked around for a bit. Soon they found a nice strip of bars in the U Street Corridor. For them it was the perfect spot to imbibe and battle the haters. They’d educate, defend that American flag, and stand ground as proud Trump supporters in our nation’s capitol over some drinks in an area they felt was swarming with Big Govt Blue Dem liberals. For David, at times it felt like he was back overseas in enemy territory. He was part of a team of two soldiers on a mission where they had to have each other’s six at all times.
It was fun for a guy with life experiences including military combat service and some Patrick Swayze type Road House stuff. A freaking blast. He and Matt found themselves in the highest of spirits. The two dudes tried to hit every bar on U Street, and seen as conservatives they were surely charged a premium for those liquid spirits!
David and Matt rose. They made the most of it. Yes, they often felt shipwrecked on an island of liberal, progressive natives. But they adapted and turned it into an adventure to take in and celebrate the great occasion. While we may not yet be in a safe harbor, it sure feels like we are no longer a nation in distress.
Keep rising like David and Matt!
So I went to the Trump inauguration, despite any argument over crowd size I will tell you it was packed. Not as full as the Obama 2008 inauguration which holds the record but it was still a full and lively crowd. Some would say the celebration of tradition, history and Constitutional process was far more important than whether who was being sworn in.
I’d disagree. For the first time the man being sworn in as President actually sided with the people of the country than the politicians seated behind him. That takes courage. Say what you want about Trump he is direct and did not hold back on holding the Washington elite behind him on the stage both Democrats and Republicans, accountable for what has happened to our country.
The proof will be in his actions not his rhetoric. What I have seen in his actions this first week tells me he is doing what he promised the people he would do and won’t prevaricate like most politicians.
I know not everyone is happy. Many are angry or maybe the anger is just a symptom of being frightened or worried about the changes Trump will make. I know the feeling. I had the same dread for the eight years of the Obama Administration. I feared the worst and I complained. It wasn’t as cataclysmic as I expected. I survived and so will those who despise, hate or just don’t like Trump and his promised agenda.
The difference between conservatives who complained about Obama for the last eight years and the liberal progressives today is stark however. You won’t remember violent protests against Obama because essentially there were none. You won’t remember threats against Obama or his supporters because essentially there were none.
You have every right to complain and even peaceably protest IF you voted for someone other than Trump. If you didn’t vote, sit down and shut up. If you did vote you don’t have the right to infringe on other people’s rights during your protest.
Despite closing streets down for most of Washington DC there were violent protests on Thursday before the inauguration and on the Friday of the inauguration. 217 protesters will now face the possibility of felony charges including over ten years in prison and up to $25,000 in fine. Frankly, that’s a well-deserved punishment. Breaking windows of Starbucks which publicly supported Hillary and Bernie by the way, assaulting others and burning cars is not a peaceable protest.
I ended up walking with the crowds of people on Saturday for the Women’s March. It was indeed a peaceable protest from everything we saw, as we walked for eleven miles around Washington DC. Much of the language and many signs were incredibly inappropriate for the children and young folk who were either attending the March or still in town celebrating the inauguration (hotels forced 3 day bookings by the way which accounted for huge numbers of people, ourselves included still using the Metro and walking the Mall)
Many of the protesters had no clear answer when asked what they were marching for. Most just retorted with Trump is a…(pick your expletive). Critical thinking skills were apparently lacking for many who obviously were incapable of explaining what they were being denied, how they were discriminated against or what they were being forced into doing. There are indeed problems, learn how to talk about them.
There is a huge division in the country today. I would encourage those who are unhappy to at the very least find a way to express your fears, anger and dissatisfaction in a peaceful and thoughtful manner and respect the rights of those you disagree with.
Sorry, Obama was NOT a nice guy.
Trump has taken over the news scene with his businesslike steamroller of leadership. He’s making good on his promises, he’s achieving things, he’s appointing quality, experienced, successful people. After a few days in office…he’s making a positive impact on our view of the future.
The imposing Obama influence will fade and the bashing will subside but reflection is oft required. One thing I was tired of hearing over the last 8 years were all the pundits – even the conservative/moderate ones – on how “they don’t agree with Obama’s policies but he’s a good father, a guy to have a beer with, in general a nice guy.”
Sorry, but you’ll never find my name on the Obama accepting, adoration, adulation love fest list of lemmings. And there’s an easy reason. He wasn’t a nice guy.
As president of the country, a world leader, an elected example of what leadership and success should be, you act accordingly. You work for the people who elected you – not against them. You look out for them and their best interests. You promote the betterment of the electorate through everything you do.
You do not:
Increase the nation’s debt more than 43 presidents ahead of you. We’re at an unsustainable level and even though Trump has some efficient, job creating ideas, the debt will still increase till the economy catches up…and $19,960,500,000,000 is not an ideal starting line for the race against financial ruin.
You don’t divide the country through racial strife by taking the side of a black professor who was lawfully detained by Cambridge police, accusing their actions as stupid, or taking the side of a black thug in FL who attacked a citizen and wound up dead by making the absurd comment that if you had a son he’d look like Trayvon. What? Laying in the dirt with a bullet hole? Or sending in your justice dept. to support another black brute in Ferguson who strong-arms a store owner then winds up dead after attacking a police officer. These and many other cases where race entered the national discourse and only further inflamed the African America race and emboldened hateful attitudes on whites and others.
You don’t make the borders a geographic sieve and open that door with a welcome FREE STUFF sign, ignoring federal laws to allow anyone in who can make it across a river or the desert, and then spreading them around the country supported by taxpayers’ money for housing, food, medical, education, transportation and who knows how many more bennies.
You don’t open the immigration corral for a Trojan horse to prance in potentially filled with “refugees” requesting asylum while plotting and planning our demise, putting us in harm’s way for Islamic terrorist actions. Claimants sucking Americans dry taking billions for all the comforts of home through monthly checks and benefits while American families suffer, vets go homeless and in need of services, and American businesses burdened to pay more in taxes to support the “complicit crime of compassion” for the world’s downtrodden masses.
You don’t take a quick moment out of your golf game to acknowledge the beheading of American citizen, James Foley, then after an obligatory “sorry about that” head back out to stroke on the next hole.
You don’t go hiding when American heroes and an ambassador are in danger’s path and then fly off to a fundraiser ignoring America’s need for facts and truth, and the involvement of the person in charge who should be spearheading a swift and devastating response.
You don’t lie for weeks to Americans and an international audience at the UN about that “internet video” that caused the Benghazi riots knowing that you had intel during the violent action that disputed your perception of the facts. But then again, what serves your upcoming election serves the moment.
You don’t continually lie, lie, and lie again to the American public about keeping your doctor or your health plan with the new BarryCare, knowing that it was deliberately conceived out of a socialistic falsehood to mislead and control the citizenry.
And you don’t release nearly two hundred radical Islamic terrorists from prison, of which 30% have returned to fight against us on the battlefield if you really cared about America’s safety.
You don’t allow a plan to be developed allowing the world’s worst sponsor of terror the ability to grow their weapons systems and get the bomb by paying $1.7 billion, the first of which was paid in cash stacked on pallets in an unmarked plane. Iran may have also received an additional $33.6 billion in cash and gold between ’14 – ’16.
And you don’t walk out the door on your last day in office throwing the keys to the country in the air while smiling about the secret $221 million you just gave to Palestine, bypassing congress’ wishes along with another $11.25 million for UN organizations, climate change and foreign affairs spending.
My point? These have nothing to do with the security, stability and sanctity of the country. None of these benefit the country or its people. But are personal decisions loosely founded on socialistic, ideological tenets of a person bent on making his social, and potentially religious, agenda more important than reason, logic or the welfare of the citizens.
So if nothing benefits the country, and in fact tends to hurt the sovereignty and security of the country, while having no basis other than a wonderful ideological wet dream for a narcissistic, pathological fascist… then it’s personal.
Add these and many more actions falling short of sound thinking, patriotic and reasonable responses to our national problems and sorry… it does not make you a nice person.
How did a well-known Muslim Brotherhood-connected Imam receive an invitation to speak at President Trump’s prayer service at the National Cathedral? The only explanation is that a rat must be in the inner circle.
It is no secret, at least to those who understand the threat of the Islamic movement in the United States, who Imam Mohamad Majid is and what his connections are. All the more alarming is his position as head Imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) as well as the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).
The ADAMS Center is one of the most Sharia adherent Mosques in the country and according to US District Court documents, ISNA was involved in funding terrorism.
ISNA is the largest Islamic organization in North America. In 2008 they requested to have their name removed from a list of unindicted co-conspirators from the biggest terrorism financing trial in the history of our country, The Holy Land Foundation trials. Thankfully the motion was rejected.
The United States District Court response to ISNA’s motion for equitable relief said this:
“Even if their filing were timely, which it is not, Petitioners’ motion would be moot. During last year’s trial, numerous exhibits were entered into evidence establishing both ISNA’s and NAIT’s intimate relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, and the defendants in this case. Accordingly, there is no possible basis for petitioner’s “expungement” from the Government’s list of co-conspirators and joint venturers. Even sealing the co-conspirator list at this juncture would be futile – the evidence has been appropriately introduced during the course of a public trial.”
Yet despite this man’s shady involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood who is HAMAS, Majid was appointed to the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working Group by Obama. And according to Discover the Networks,
“Magid was authorized to train and advise personnel affiliated with the FBI and other federal agencies. He soon became a regular visitor to the White House, and merged as perhaps the most influential and sought-after Muslim authority in the United States.”
So, not only was Imam Majid given access to our national security apparatus, but a leadership role directing how our law enforcement would be trained to fight Islamic terrorism. You really can’t make this stuff up, and as many have said before me it is a case of the fox guarding the henhouse.
After understanding just a little of this man’s background and involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood, a group seeking to undermine our Constitution in order to establish the Caliphate through Sharia Law, one could appreciate the anger of seeing him praying in the National Cathedral last Saturday.
According to Center for Security Policy,
“A new group, Faith Leaders for America (FLA), has just issued a strong statement opposing Imam Mohamed Magid’s inclusion in the service attended by the President and Vice President this morning at the National Cathedral.”
The FLA presented their concerns about the Muslim Brotherhood in America the day before President Trump’s inauguration. Their statement to Trump follows,
“We want you to know you have our prayerful support as you begin to counter jihad and protect Americans from Islamic terrorism. When you label the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, we support you.”
More importantly, who invited and vetted this Imam in order for him to participate in a prayer service for our country and newly elected President Trump? This is troubling when you consider President Trump vowed the day before in his inaugural address to rid the world of radical Islamic terrorism.
Only two angles are possible here, either the person making those executive decisions within the transition team is ignorant of this very real threat to our Constitution by the insidious Muslim Brotherhood or they are complicit in their goals. Either way, someone should answer for it, and Imam Majid should not be given one iota of access to President Trump.
We are in a battle for the heart of our country in many areas. One of those is an Islamic infiltration of our government in the form of The Muslim Brotherhood/HAMAS front organizations. The war cannot be won against Islamic ideology if we allow the heads of those groups to have leadership and prominent positions in our national security sectors and be given time to speak and “pray” over our new President and his administration.
President Trump gave the government back to We the People, so we need to demand that it be free of the influence of our enemies. The best way forward is to have the Secretary of State declare The Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
This declaration would free our law enforcement to pull those members out not only of sensitive areas in our government, but from Mosques throughout this country who continue to preach hate towards Western Civilization as well as encourage jihad on our soil.
It is up to us to make America great again. This cannot happen if we continue to shelter the enemy, and allow people to grant the Muslim Brotherhood protected status in Trump’s new administration.
*Incidentally the ADAMS center just purchased land to build a 22,400 square foot Mosque in Prince William County, Virginia.
In 2015 the Supreme Court decided to legalize same-sex marriage in all 50 states. Yet, we have seen many in the LGBTQ community reject the idea that they must accept the President elected by all 50 states.
That’s funny, there were many objecting to the law, yet it was completely forced on the entire country. If you disagreed aloud you were considered a homophobe. It never occurred to the supporters that some of us had a few questions on how it could affect the future. Could this be the beginning of the government forcing what most believe to be immoral upon the country? Next I knew everyone wanted to use the same bathroom. Are the women’s restroom lines not long enough as it is?
This is the classic, “give them an inch, they take a yard” scenario. It went from equality and tolerance to totalitarian . If we are sympathizing with people’s feelings, shouldn’t we have to sympathize across the board? We can’t teach God in schools any longer, but same-sex marriage has been added to textbooks. Perhaps you have parents against gay rights just as much as some parents are against my man Jesus?
Just this past weekend we witnessed the Women’s March claim to be an inclusive get together of solidarity. However, if you are pro life or pro Trump, yeah the President of the United States, you weren’t invited. I am a firm believer that the rule of law is very important. Changing laws to make someone feel like they are a part of a team, that they later don’t want to be a part of, seems silly. I personally am not bothered by gay rights, though, I am fearful of this road of “tolerance” we seem to be on.
At this rate we will make one big circle to conservative views, or we will have another Civil War. If I were a snowflake against the right to bear arms, I would chill.
Trump’s triumphant win has already, and will continue to change America.
First, I must express my honor and pleasure at joining the contributing team here at RNR. A group of patriotic, insightful writers who add to our daily lives with realities not rhetoric, specifics not speculation, and information not fabrication.
To the Trump Effect: Initially, was Trump my choice? Not 100% at first for I considered many things I read, heard, and experienced in thinking of the all-important, much needed BHO replacement.
His mannerism, speech, persona exhibited someone that many weren’t comfortable with. Over the course of my years of serving national and international clients, I’ve had a few billionaires and many millionaires on the list and the reality is… they are different.
They think and speak differently. And while they think about what they say (most the time), they’re usually 10-15 minutes – or months – ahead of the conversation, thinking about ramifications, alternatives, consequences, liabilities, and the all-important rewards of what they’re saying and involved with. They see the world in terms of profits, losses, logic, reason – RESULTS. After all, they’re worth a billion dollars and we’re not.
Trump – the Henry Ford of our times? In court when opposing lawyers attempted to prove Ford’s incompetence, and lack of substantial required knowledge, he answered simply:
“If I should really WANT to answer the foolish question you have just asked, or any of the other questions you have been asking me, let me remind you that I have a row of electric push-buttons on my desk, and by pushing the right button, I can summon to my aid men who can answer ANY question I desire to ask concerning the business to which I am devoting most of my efforts.”
Trump has his row of buttons and is accustomed to demanding and getting results. His own ego dictates he succeed, and failure on the world stage is not an option. And to ensure that his new found political position doesn’t prove inadequate or failed in future history books, he has done what every successful businessman does, he surrounds himself with those who are successful and know their job.
Again, people like Trump are generally concerned with one thing: RESULTS. For people in those lofty realms of financial success are usually the ones responsible, answerable for their actions therefore they want the best.
In business when you don’t succeed, you go out of business, or, if you’re the president or on the board, you find yourself removed, relegated to some new position overseeing the basement steno pool of life.
In politics, it’s far less conclusive and damaging. Once in office, achieving is just staying there – not accomplishing anything. Rarely are politicians replaced for not doing anything, for when the final tally is in about that new law to better American and it didn’t pass? They’ll blame the Democrats or Republicans or not enough votes or it cost too much or some insane justification for their failure.
Even before taking office in the early hours of his soon to be presidency, brokering deals was part of his strategy. For whether it was jobs saved or created at Carrier, Ford, US Steel, Softbank or Alibaba, saving money on our government’s expenses, or just the positive mindset of people and businesses exhibited during the recent holidays, you can chalk it all up to…. The Trump Effect.
The view of America has been changing since that November 9th morning when the final numbers came in bringing his race for the white house to a successful close. America has seen a more positive attitude over the holiday season than it’s seen in years.
Donald Trump’s time has come and represents a change in our country’s desired, needed direction for leadership. Barack Obama was elected because a majority of Americans hated Bush, but many also felt “it was time” for America’s first black president.
Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic/Progressive/Socialist leaning opponent, was being pushed not only because of her own feeling of entitlement, but many believed again, “it was time” for dramatic change and America’s first woman president. Those thinking she would be another Margaret Thatcher or Indira Priyadarshini Gandhi were more blinded by ideology than controlled by facts and reason.
It was with trust and faith that most voted for Trump because of his “swamp draining” promise, also because – HE WAS NOT A POLITICIAN, but a successful American businessman whose approach is needed in a wasteful, deceitful, inefficient, ineffective government.
Whether it’s his solving of the big chair problem at his California resort, fixing New York City’s skating rink debacle, or creating world peace… He seeks to engage and promote The Trump Effect.
His time in office will prove tough and demanding but with a good team beside him, his own logical thinking and the support and patience of the American public, this country could see the bottom line increase and America become great again.
In reality, time will certainly be the final judge, but maybe a little forethought, hard work at the desk instead of the golf course and dedication and love for the country will prove that life can be better, work can be productive, the nation can be secure and we’ll all benefit from the effectiveness of Trump, hence….. The Trump Effect.
Can we stop pretending Representative John Lewis is relevant?
Rep Lewis got himself into a beef with President Elect Donald Trump, yet people are acting as if this beef actually deserves a spotlight. Way before I was born, Representative Lewis found himself on the front line in many dangerous situations fighting for civil rights. He clearly played a key role in desegregation of the south. I am just trying to figure out what he has done since then?
John Lewis has been a Georgia politician since 1987, yes 30 years, and has not brought forth one law to better the circumstances of black people in America. Lets go a bit deeper, he has not brought forth one law, period. He has organized demonstrations and made a stink about not attending inaugurations of president elects he doesn’t consider a friend. He has publically opposed a few bills, didn’t offer any fixes, but made sure to throw a fit. Basically, Representative Lewis throws temper tantrums that are seen by more than just people in a Walmart check out line.
I hate to be rude, not really, John Lewis may be one of the least effective members of congress. The 50-something democrats on the hill not attending this year’s inauguration claim they are being a voice for their constituents. Well, what about the constituents that voted for President Elect Trump? What message are you sending the Trump supporters in your district? Better yet, which finger are you waving their way?
If we regress to the 1590s, we’re introduced to an inquiry by ‘ol Bill Shakespeare. Act 2, scene 2 of Romeo and Juliet. In the thought of calling things by different names and the meaning thereof, would “a rose by any other name smell as sweet?”
In life, we’re all given names. I’m Ron, I have friends named Bruce and Lou, Marsha and Sue, Tracy and Tim. I know them by their names for the purpose of recognition and communicating. Names used to be… just names.
Names were/are distinctive identifiers telling who we’re talking about and who we know, who we were with or who did this and that. In olden days I would be Ron, son of Robert, and now we manage and make it through our daily lives with more simplicity and less formality. I remember being on a production once and there were 2 Rons running cameras. Yep, the shot assignments from the director got a bit messed up so… we started using our “nicknames.” I was/am RB or just Boat to my friends.
We can go back to England for the term “nickname” which meant: “also or added,” originally being “ekename.” But the term actually came from ancient Greece and Rome when nicknames were used as terms of affection: hupokorisma or meaning “calling by an endearing name.”
But soon, maybe in the early to mid 1900’s, names became less identifiers and more descriptive. An epithet of our lives. Joe Louis was the “Brown Bomber” and the feared “Louisville Lip” was Muhammad Ali. Charlie Parker was “Bird” and Frank was of course “ol Blue eyes.”
Some nicknames were taken from their appearance, some from their actions, capabilities or talents. But they were descriptions, describing the person with – or without – any implied affection.
I’d like to be “Ron the nice guy.” I know “Bruce the artist” and “Al the patriot.” But guys were also known for their personas such as “gentle Ben,” “Tom the jerk” or “Jerry that idiot.” Girls, it seems, have had a problem in that rarely do you hear about “Mary the genius” but more about “Sandy the slut” or “Jenny the whore” or Betty the tease”: Names with a more sexual overtone as well as negative implications.
A longtime friend and business partner saw life and people in forms of reality and truth. He told me in the 70s, “Ron, there are blacks and niggas, whites and honkies. It’s the individual that defines themselves not their race or color.” He himself was a black American and saw the good and bad in people coming from inside, not from their name or position in life, so it became a descriptor that labeled them usually by their own deeds.
There’s enough hated to go around in names like “Whitey” or “Cracker,” “Spic” and “Slant-eye” but when it comes down to it, stick and stones etc. etc. etc. It’s we the people, the individual, that must break out of any societal or self-imposed mold, make our mark, leave our impression and affect for good the status quo of society. It’s on us to be the best we can be whatever our name is.
We’ve certainly made a leap from Al Capone’s “Scarface” to Cordozar Broadus Jr. as “Snoop Doggy Dogg,” “Snoopzilla,” “Snoop Dogg” and now, “Snoop Lion.” Hummmm.
But now we find that, the “descriptors” assigned to people have taken on a more sinister, darker and more negative characteristic. Ones that can indicate and project implied danger or deceit. The political arena is increasingly replete with people known for their ways, their actions, and their destructive course, and “described” not just named.
When Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama was running for office, it was imperative that the middle name be dropped (to obviously escape unwanted, unintended associations and references?), but now in office it’s fully Barack Hussein Obama and we start to see how negative monikers can be applied, suggested – or earned. His past and present image and activities bring up nicknames such as Bathhouse Barry, Benghazi Barry, O’Dumbo and more.
Alliteration constantly weaves its way into our social and certainly political vocabulary with Michelle becoming ”the Mooch” or “Moochie” based on her extravagant, taxpayer fed spending habits. And “Harry the Hobbler” or the “Obstructer” is finally no longer the gatekeeper and in charge of blocking progress in the Senate, while “Benedict Boehner,” the “Traitor,” is continuing his unpopular stance as Speaker in the House.
A “Portmanteau” (a word you don’t hear much) is expressed in the names and references such as “Hitlery” and serve as a reference as well as associating some to others with less acceptability and more nefariousness in their actions and positions in the past – and possibly to their obscured, intentioned goals and purposes for the future.
So we might take note that names have made the natural – and possibly somewhat logical – progression from identifiers, to descriptors, to warnings. Barry the Destroyer or Obama the Tyrant, and associated names like “Socialist,” “Communist,” or “Progressive” all have their roots in reality and meanings that project an image of unwanted, forewarned impending futures for us as Americans. Add them to a proper name and the person’s documented (or hidden) history and agenda, and you see the implied and portrayed meaning of their personality and public façade.
We hear things in names and yet we’re also a visual people and we want to see things. It’s been said that the French eat with their tongues while Americans eat with their eyes. Meaning we are less influenced by the reality of some situations and experience a more “effected perception” through site and sound.
This is certainly evidenced in the fact that millions did not do their homework, their “reality check,” did not look beyond the “well spoken, clean African-American” candidate but instead took their voting lead from perceived and oblique benefits and goodwill portrayed in words and promises, rhetoric and the slogans like Hope and Change.
And of course the next slogan in the progression of political promotion for the American public in 2012 was a view ahead also known as Barack Obama’s newest campaign catchphrase, “Forward” – which also happens to be a Nazi marching song of the Hitler youth, Vorwärts! Vorwärts!
You can do your own research, find similarities that are not lost on these two world leaders with renowned names, but the effect on the American mindset, the uneasiness and uncertainty, the ultimate change in the American business and social landscape is occurring… and Mein Kampf is rapidly immerging through our leader’s words, actions, descriptions, names and directives. Democrats should learn that words (and names) have meaning.
Juliet said in the 1590’s: “’Tis but thy name that is my enemy.”
But for us today, America needs to open its collective eyes, see what is real, not hear what’s proclaimed, for the real essence of truth from William of old is: “what matters is what something is, not what it is called” be it a rose or a comrade.
Could a tyrant by any other name transform America as easily? We the attempts and hopefully our direction will change.
Last night’s Golden Globe Awards were an absolute embarrassment. They were an embarrassment not just for the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, but for liberals everywhere.
The heroes and heroines of tolerance and acceptance displayed widespread intolerance and ignorance through the stage medium they were given last night. However, there were none so ignorant as Meryl Streep. She was awarded the Cecil B. DeMille Award for lifetime achievement last night. She took the stage gracefully, as only Meryl Streep could do and then spoke to the world in the poor, unrefined way that only a Hollywood feminist would.
Before she used her airtime to exploit a journalist’s disability, she pushed multiculturalism as a means to subvert the danger that globalization poses to the sovereignty of this nation. She went around the room and revealed which actors were born abroad as well as where they were born. Leave it to Hollywood to try and humanize the evil that is globalization and make anyone who opposes it into an intolerant monster. Many nefarious aims have been imposed under the banners of multiculturalism and associated slogans such as “equality” and “human rights.” Like the word “democracy,” used to justify the bombing of sundry states in recent history, these slogans often serve as rhetoric to beguile the well-intentioned while hiding the aims of those motivated by little if anything other than power and greed. Power and greed are what fuel Streep’s desperate appeal to the emotions of the American people who feel as though they have very much in common with her, yet unfortunately have nothing in common with her.
This is the danger in voting with our emotions instead of our intellect. Streep is the epitome of that danger. She shows how the rejection of the facts can damage her stance and then eventually, the country as a whole. It is largely the reason that the Clinton campaign underestimated the American people so. They assumed that the people of this country were much more emotional, meaning they could have been more easily swayed by their rhetoric — they weren’t.
Women are more emotional than men. Plain and simple. To deny this would be to deny biology, to deny facts. Again, many people will criticize this because it hurts their feelings or offends them, but it makes it no less true. Male and female brains are, in fact, wired differently. This is why it is imperative that women consciously make the effort not to be swayed on appeals to their emotions and to stay vigilant and true to the facts.
The story most dominating the news the past few days is that of the special needs teen being tortured by four young adults in Chicago. As usual, race is permeating the coverage. The victim is white and the perpetrators are black. The level of coverage is so high because the attack was recorded and posted on Facebook. Many conservatives are noting that had it not been for the video, the story would not have gotten so much coverage and the coverage still pales in comparison to what it would have been if the races were reversed. I have no doubt this is true, but this is not the point of my article.
I was listening to a black radio station that was discussing the topic. While each caller called the actions vile, reprehensible and inexcusable, there were two recurring themes that stood out to me: the need to be sure not to internalize and the parallel of crimes committed by whites.
I am in agreement with those who say that blacks should not internalize crimes like these. I say the same about any crime. There is no plausible reason why as a black man I should take on guilt, societal judgment or shame for a crime committed by someone else simply because he is black. To expect me to or to say, “That’s how blacks act” would be foolish and the very definition of racist. Here’s the problem. Many mistakenly believe this is exactly what white conservatives do. This is not true. Saying that a certain percentage of crimes are committed by blacks, when it is factual and disproportionately high, is not the same as saying that all blacks do it or committing the crime is a ‘black trait’.
There is simply no logical correlation to these thoughts on internalization, for anyone. However, there seems to be a constant demand from many on the left for whites to internalize, and in many cases apologize for, the Klan, slavery and other ills of ‘whites’. Are they saying that blacks should not be judged by the crimes of other blacks but whites are not afforded the same courtesy? This is at best illogical and at worst racist.
Speaking of the crimes of whites, there were also several callers who said the crime was bad but we’re exagerating it because it paled in comparison to the crimes of whites over the years. This is faulty syllogism. The existence of other crimes and the race of their perpetrators has no bearing on how a crime should be charged or judged. It’s like saying to a killer, “You shouldn’t have killed that man but fortunately for you, someone just killed two women and a child, that’s worse so you’re free to go!”
This is the type of emotional based thinking that led us to hate crimes to begin with. I understand how a criminal’s punishment can be adjusted based on severity of the crime, number of victims, method, or other factors but trying to determine someone’s motive or making a crime more extreme based on the characteristics of the victim is senseless. In addition to making some victims’ lives more valuable than others, it also portends to change the gravity of the crime. If you’re unsure, ask yourself if the crime these four youths committed would have been more or less severe if the victim were black? Obviously, the answer is no.
The solution is to stop seeing everything through a racial lens. As hard as this is for many, the easiest situations should be those involving crimes, especially heinous ones. We should all agree that this act was horrendous, sympathize for the victim and not assume all blacks act in this manner. The same goes for crimes committed by whites. There is no ‘groupthink’ on violent crime. As Viktor Frankl, a psychiatrist and holocaust survivor whose wife, brother and mother were killed by Nazis, said when asked if he hated Germans, “No. There are only two races, the decent and the indecent.”
Written by: RNR Guest Blogger C. Douglas Love
Read more about C. Douglas Love, and more of his work, on his website http://thinkordie.org/index.html
On Thursday, December 15, Republican representative, Mary Bentley proposed a bill that would ban junk food purchases under food stamps in Arkansas. The bill would require Arkansas’s Department of Human Services to obtain a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which provides food stamps. Items like soda, chips, and candy bars would be disallowed.
Although I am not an Arkansas resident, I am in full support of this proposal and believe that it should become a nation wide policy. The money that goes to food stamps comes out of the paychecks of hardworking Americans, like you and I. Why should hard workers who have their own expenses be forced to pay for someone’s else’s unhealthy junk food?
I have witnessed recipients of food stamps abuse the program, first hand.
When I was completing my senior year of high school in early 2016, I worked at a convenience store in Michigan as a sales associate. A vast amount of individuals came in, used food stamps to buy pop, gummy bears, and candy, and then used cash for cigars, lottery tickets, and lighters. These are not people in genuine need of help while they seek employment. These are entitled people who are gleefully abusing the system and piggybacking off the dimensions of working people.
It’s very insulting that a percentage of my income goes to pay for other people’s extras. If you are receiving food stamps from the government, you should be doing everything to find work that will allow you to support yourself instead of relying on other people’s money. Some may argue that food stamps belong to the recipient once the government issues them, but this is erroneous. The money invested in food stamps is not the property of the program’s recipients. They did not work for it, so therefore, it does not belong to them. It belongs to all the hard workers of America. Government assistance could not exist without our economic labor.
The Special Supplemental Nutritional Program (or ‘food stamps’) is highly parasitic in nature. It relies on people who go to work everyday to support ourselves. It takes without giving and breeds an attitude of entitlement from those on the receiving end. What incentive do they have to work if everything is handed to them, free of charge?
This must end. I fully look forward to seeing all junk food purchases banned nationwide under food stamps.
Written by: RNR Contributor Gabrielle Seunagal
It’s not just the past Christmas season that brought these facts to mind, but a consolidation of emotions and thoughts that propel us toward a new year and a hopefully a less ungodly America.
We must, or should, admit that America is unique. Conceived in liberty – Born out of revolution – Based on forethought, reason and freedom. A country whose very essence and form of governance is like no other ever developed.
Forgive me while I digress factually for a moment. The tyrannical oppression of England, the burden of over taxation through the Sugar Act (1764), or the Stamp Act (1765), the controlling monopolistic policies of the Tea Act (1773) and the general concept of taxation without representation (They should see taxation WITH representation) all contributed to the desire for change. More and more regulations and taxes to pay for England’s debt from the French and Indian War (1763)… and the colonists didn’t like it.
These were a spark, the basis for change. It became clear that a separation was needed for many reasons. A new and better country based more on a sense of fairness, good, what’s right, strong religious principles, independence – and a desire for freedom, hence the foundation for our United States.
Our founding fathers were brilliant, thoughtful men of deep religious convictions based in the Bible and their Christian faith in Jesus Christ. Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence, nearly half (24) held seminary or Bible school degrees.
Adams and Jefferson, Madison and Hamilton, and many of their colleagues were men of exceptional European learning. They immersed themselves in the Greek and Latin classics, in the history of medieval and modern Europe, in British and French constitutional theory and practice. And they were men of action. They understood mistakes of the past and had a clear, intimate awareness of the special needs for a new America.
While in Turkey (Aug. 2009), President Obama casually rebuked the concept that the United States is a Judeo-Christian nation. “…we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.”
How wrong and descriptively demeaning can one be? Where do the best, most solid “ideals and set of values” come from if not a foundation of true inner and religious beliefs – not in social justice ideology. And yes, the basis for our country was a belief and dependence on God and his own wisdom and guidance for us.
God has systematically been reduced, slighted and eliminated from our culture more and more over the last few years. The taking of the words “under God” from our pledge to our flag, the daily practice of even pledging allegiance to this flag and the country has been stripped from acceptance. And forget about prayers in school any more.
“In God we trust” offends people who use our money. The mere presence of a nativity scene or “Christ”mas tree drives many to the local courthouse, the Ten Commandments are removed from view, and in 2007 (and with many maneuvering explanations) the monogram of “IHS” was covered from view behind the president during a speech at Georgetown University. When growing up this was predominant in our church standing for “In His Service” – or the service of God – even though it actually comes from the original Greek for Jesus’ name, being the first three letters of “ihsous.”
The following Christian quotes of the founding fathers stand as testament to their strong moral and spiritual convictions which helped form the fundamentals of our nation and our government. And these represent only a small sampling of their views, beliefs and many writings.
George Washington – 1st U.S. President
“While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.”
John Adams – 2nd U.S. President and Signer of the Declaration of Independence
“Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God … What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be.”
And Adams wrote in 1813, a letter to Thomas Jefferson, excerpts being:
“The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were the…general Principles of Christianity.” “Now I will avow, that I then believe, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature…”
Thomas Jefferson – 3rd U.S. President, Drafter & Signer of the Declaration of Independence
“I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.”
John Hancock – 1st Signer of the Declaration of Independence
“Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. … Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us.”
Benjamin Franklin – Signer of the Declaration of Independence & Unites States Constitution
“Here is my Creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That He ought to be worshipped.”
“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, is the best the world ever saw, or is likely to see.”
Samuel Adams – Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Father of the American Revolution
“And as it is our duty to extend our wishes to the happiness of the great family of man, I conceive that we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world that the rod of tyrants may be broken to pieces, and the oppressed made free again…and speedily bringing on that holy and happy period when the kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and all people everywhere willingly bow to the sceptre of Him who is Prince of Peace.”
James Madison – 4th U.S. President
“A watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest while we are building ideal monuments of Renown and Bliss here we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven.”
Rev. John Witherspoon, president of Princeton University when James Madison graduated wrote:
“Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ.” [Can you imagine such writings in liberal academia today?]
Add to the above even more words, references and beliefs from:
James Monroe – 5th U.S. President
John Quincy Adams – 6th U.S. President
William Penn – Founder of Pennsylvania
Roger Sherman – Signer of the Declaration of Independence and United States Constitution
Alexander Hamilton – Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Ratifier of the U.S. Constitution
Patrick Henry – Ratifier of the U.S. Constitution
These men, while religious in their core beliefs, also knew that a governing body should have no demands on its citizens to worship a particular way other than to hold principles of value that enhance the lives of all men. Principles we have been losing through the social evolution of more recent time.
The 60’s brought its “social freedoms” of drugs, sex and rock and roll. And the “right” to do as we wish personally without regard to punishment or consequences. These are seen in the basic principles and actions of our current president and his selected team of “social sovereigns” – ideals born in the 60’s with views and actions toward man and not God. Even belittling or denying God.
People believe in many paths to God as is their privilege. So much a civil right that our founders established its steadfastness in the First Amendment to the Constitution: Two rights in fact.
The first part being known as the “Establishment Clause” which prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or showing preference of one over another.
The second is the “Free Exercise Clause” which prohibits the government from interfering with a person’s right to practice his or her religion. Religious freedom is an absolute right guaranteed and without government control, however this has been boldly abused lately and with Constitutional disregard.
My reasoning behind this exercise in history is straightforward. To show that we are drifting knowingly and deliberately, dangerously away from the basis of our foundation and the beliefs of our founding fathers which served us well for nearly 200 years – until modern society decided it knew better.
The concept of being a Christian nation is not limiting, not controlling or demanding of anyone to believe in a common path to heaven. Nowhere is it found that our founders expressed a Christian point of view for this purpose but yet, a set of values which guide our lives and actions toward others and… we are losing them. They talked of these principles in the terms of freedom, charity, law, liberty, kindness and duties of good citizenship.
Many will say that our founders were Deists and not Christians, but Deism is a position that God does not intervene in the “natural world” but allows it to run according to the laws of nature. I think one can clearly appreciate that our founders believed that God held the power and set the rules for a life above and beyond our mere existence.
As we embark on a new year, a future of questionable “retainment” of rights, freedoms and ability to live and enjoy in our personal and yes, our religious lives seems to have been answered. It’s important to recognize the eroding of these rights in the past; One by one – little by little. When government can dictate to and demand of established religions a change in their belief system to fit “changing social values,” can other more diabolical intentions be far behind for the betterment of a society gone askew from God?
As Thomas Jefferson said, “God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God?” I sincerely take this not just as Jefferson’s belief, but a warning lest we remove God from our lives and society. And aren’t we daily doing just this?
America is a unique and well founded country that had everyone’s best interest at heart without need for changing its core beliefs. Unlike a recent rant by CNN’s Piers Morgan, it is not “time for an amendment to the Bible” and “the American Constitution is not inherently flawed.”
Whether Protestant, Jew, Hindu, Catholic, Buddhist, or of any organized religion, there are values and a divine guidance, something bigger and better than ourselves that can enhance our lives. I wish you nothing but happiness and success in this New Year and hope that whatever your religious basis, it brings you peace and contributes to the betterment of yourself, your family and the country we all love as conceived by our founders.
Don’t trust the government or mainstream media regarding alleged “Russian hacking” which again recently took a front page position on the (Fake News) Washington Post. This story is to report that the Washington Post’s original article from 3 days ago was nothing but a bunch of lies. It also serves to attempt to defend the legitimacy of a recent government report that was supposed to prove Russia hacked the election. The report did no such thing. That of course is tied to the Obama administration and the Washington Post trying to paint Donald Trump as a Russian stooge. All of these things keep being exposed as lies. That doesn’t stop the Washington Post and the government from spreading these lies purposefully. That is why I can’t trust the government or mainstream media on Russian hacking. Nor should you.
I should start at the beginning of this, but I think I covered it pretty well in my Dec 26th ariticle and again in my Dec 30th article. Both articles detail how the government under the Obama administration is trying to blame the loss of Hillary Clinton in the Presidential election on Russia. They claim WikiLeaks which released the Hillary Clinton State Department emails in March 2016, the DNC emails in July 2016, and the Podesta emails in October 2016 were all originally hacked by the Russians. They ignore that all of the information in those emails is true. The corruption exposed with the government and mainstream media collusion they don’t want Americans to read. Russian hacking excuses Hillary Clinton, who should be in jail, for losing the election because the Russians wanted Trump.
So we go to the story the Washington Post released Friday December 30th 2016. This article now has a very revealing recently added editor’s note on it.
Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said that Russian hackers had penetrated the U.S. electric grid. Authorities say there is no indication of that so far. The computer at Burlington Electric that was hacked was not attached to the grid.
The headline of the original article, “Russian operation hacked a Vermont utility, showing risk to U.S. electrical grid security, officials say” is an alarmist statement in itself. The Washington Post appears to want to deflect from their previous fake news stories trying to link Trump and the Russians by printing new fake news stories to frighten the American people. Maybe they think if Americans are afraid enough, they won’t look for the truth. The problem is that Zero Hedge immediately exposed the Washington Post’s Dec. 30 article as false. Just to be clear, the Washington Post in another retracted story because it was false, accused Zero Hedge of being a fake news website.
The irony isn’t lost as the supposedly legitimate mainstream media keeps getting exposed as liars by the alternative media who they claim are the liars. Then if you go to the DNC and Podesta emails and read their contents, you understand the mainstream media and the government collude to lie to the American public. The Podesta emails show the Hillary Clinton campaign wanted an ignorant and compliant public so she could get elected. Of course they failed, but the lies and deception continue.
The implication that the Russians hacked our electrical grid is a particularly dangerous lie. Think of the implications of a foreign power turning off the lights in America and they remained off for a week. Most Americans don’t have any idea of how to survive without power. People in the big cities would quickly find the stores empty. Running water would stop because electricity is required to pump water into most of our plumbing. People would would begin to panic after a few days, and 90% would begin to starve. Even worse, most don’t have access or the knowledge of how to make potable water. This means thirst, dehydration, and dangerous pollutants would quickly become a serious health concern.
Those are just a few of the problems with the power going out for a week. There are some pretty good doom and gloom videos that speculate on how quickly are large percentage of America would die without electricity.
They make a lot of good points that my own life experiences have trained me not to be personally concerned about. In Liberia as a teenager we boiled and filtered our own water. Growing up fishing, and working in the safari trade in Zimbabwe taught me a lot about hunting, snaring, and foraging. I know how to purify water and find my own food. I retaught myself those skills when I returned to America. It also gave me fire arms and first aid training. Then owning good camping gears is also part of my lifestyle. This causes me not to fear for my own safety in a grid down situation so much, but I fear for the safety of family and friends.
The Washington Post, in an attempt to legitimize the Obama administration’s attempts to paint Trump as a Russian puppet, were willing to create panic with lies. On this point, I am glad the American people are largely asleep at the wheel to the reality in their own country. Instead of massive panic, Americans largely enjoyed the New Year weekend oblivious to Washington Post’s attempt to create fear. The Americans that are switched on and pay attention didn’t panic because good news sources like Zero Hedge quickly exposed the lies. So did Forbes, Info Wars, and Breitbart.
Americans need to ask themselves a very serious question as these lies are repeatedly exposed. Why is the mainstream media, Obama administration, and neoconservatives holding on to their Russia narrative? Why are they teaming up and being exposed as fools, but keep trying to legitimize their lies?
The simple answer is the American people rebelled and voted them out of power. They fear what a President Trump may bring to the White House. Trump promised to “drain the swamp” or more simply put, reinstate the Rule of Law. To the corrupt politicians, the fear of the gravy train coming to an end is horrible. That they might face jail time for crimes they committed is terrifying thought. A President Trump promised to make the elite accountable under the law, so they seek to stop him by any means they can get away with.
The Russian hacking lie was really an attempt to legitimize a coup against the election of President-Elect Trump in December. The CIA leaked the story of Russian hacking originally to the Washington Post in an attempt to change the Electoral College vote. That attempt failed like the protests after the election and the Jill Stein recounts failed.
This is something else they want to hide. Project Veritas released a series of videos exposing organized Democratic operatives conspiring to commit massive voter fraud and to organize violent protests. America got to witness those protests all through Donald Trump’s campaign. The establishment keeps toting that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. They don’t want you to remember organized voter fraud of the above mentioned videos, illegal immigrants being urged to vote by Barack Obama, or that Jill Stein’s recount uncovered massive voting fraud in Detroit. They want to hide that their efforts to delegitimize a Trump presidency have all failed.
The problem I have with the recent articles in the Washington Post is that it is just garbage piled on top of garbage. They explain that although their previous article has been proven false, today they are reporting the truth. Then they continue to push that although it is unproven, that Russian hacking is really bad. Due to the dangers the Russians pose, you can really trust the Obama administration and government agencies to protect the American people and tell the truth. If we just move on from all the previous exposed lies, the Washington Post and government are going to be honest from this point on.
Of course they fail to report on Chinese hacking. That allowed China to access government records and steal corporate trade secrets. China destroyed the American steel industry by hacking their secrets. Millions of American manufacturing jobs have been lost through many different industries due to Chinese hacking. Yet the Obama administration and Washington post double down on the dangers of Russian hackers.
The Washington Post is trying to wash its hands of being exposed as liars, by reporting that they got caught lying. I could go on for hours, but I think I made my point. The establishment, as it the progressives, neoconservatives, their corporate masters, and mainstream media minions have been repeatedly exposed as liars. They plan to double down on their lies to try and stop Trump. The establishment fears a returning of the Rule of Law to America.
Will Trump “drain the swamp”? I don’t know, we have to get him into office to find out. The current establishment is pushing Russia aggressively in a campaign to sow fear. They are pushing so hard that we risk war. America needs to keep calling the establishment out on its lies to keep them destroying our country.
Written by: RNR Guest Blogger Michael F. Martin
Read more about Michael F. Martin, and more of his work, on his website http://www.michaelfmartin.com/about/
Recently, over on social media I saw a CNN story that announced Russia was going to close the Anglo American School and American vacation datcha in Moscow. It was a shock, I spent 1979 -1982 living in Moscow when my dad was assigned to the American Embassy. I went to that school as a little kid when it only operated on a K through 7th grade basis. It was against policy for American personal to have teenage children living in the USSR. I also took vacations with my family and attended summer camp at that datcha. This was a nasty Russian attack against the families of Americans stationed in Moscow. Today I woke up to find out the CNN was again publishing “Fake News” for public consumption. They published an outright lie. This meant CNN and the Obama administration made absolute fools out of themselves with Russia.
Let’s be clear on where this started. This started with the WikiLeaks release of the Hillary Clinton Secretary of State emails in March 2016. That was when the “Russia is hacking us” narrative started. With the release of the DNC emails in July and the Podesta emails in October, the democrats and Obama administration kept doubling down on the Russian narrative. Now Russian hacking is being blamed on why Hillary Clinton was such an incompetent candidate and lost the Presidential election.
Back when our Electoral College vote was coming up, the CIA got in on the action and leaked that there is a secret report showing the Russians were behind the WikiLeaks email releases. On Thursday Dec 29, the Obama administration doubled down again and expelled 35 Russian diplomatsand shut down two facilities. To justify the action they had the FBI release a report supposedly detailing the Russian hacking. The report gets into the science of hacking but provided no verifiable evidence. The fact that the report comes with a disclaimer makes it comical.
“this report is provided “as is” for informational purposes only. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within. DHS does not endorse any commercial product or service referenced in this advisory or otherwise.”
I’m going to unpack all of this because it is absolute silliness. Expelled or PNGing 35 Russian diplomats is an unprecedented attack. In the past when we got mad and expelled say a GS-13 level diplomat who was really a spy, Russia or back in the day, the USSR would retaliate by expelling an American GS-13 level diplomat who was a spy. It has been tit for tat all through the Cold War. They knew who our spies were with diplomatic cover and we know theirs. 35 at once and shutting down 2 Russian facilities is a sledgehammer blow.
You would expect the Russians would get mad and reply on a massive scale in return. Instead this came as one of the first Russian replies.
Then a few hours later CNN published the story about Russia announcing the closure of the Anglo American School and the vacation datcha.
If the story was true, that would be Russia playing twice as dirty as the Obama administration. It is the middle of the school year and the children’s parents would be scrambling to relocate their children to get schooling People might quit their job in Moscow as a result to move their kids back home. Worse, a husband or wife might choose to split the family and live apart while the other completes their posting to Moscow. This wouldn’t just affect the American community, but the British, Canadian, and all the other countries that send their kids to that school.
As I said, if it were true. Russian officials replied to the CNN story.
Information on the closure of the Anglo-American School in Moscow spread by CNN is completely false, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, wrote on her Facebook page.
“U.S. officials ‘anonymously informed’ their media that Russia closed the Anglo-American School in Moscow as a retaliatory measure,” she said. “That’s a lie. Apparently, the White House has completely lost its senses and began inventing sanctions against its own children.”
If the Russians are trying to make CNN and the Obama administration look like absolute idiots, they succeeded. The leak to the CNN came from and unnamed “US official briefed on the matter.” That makes it sound like it came from the Obama administration itself. Perhaps it did, maybe they thought the American public would get so outraged, that by the time it was disproved, it wouldn’t matter. Obama really seems to want to push the Russians into a war. Public outrage might give him the excuse to create and emergency to keep Donald Trump from taking office.
I can’t believe the Obama administration is that stupid though. What I think really happened it the Russians punked a diplomat into leaking false information to CNN, therefore discrediting CNN and the Obama administration. It was a rope-a-dope operation using the Obama administrations aggression against itself.
The concept is simple. When Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats, mainstream press was waiting for Russia to retaliate. So the Russian’s decided to have some fun with the situation to make mainstream media and Obama look stupid. Russian officials at a cocktail party or in a bar or restaurant targeted an American diplomat they knew wasn’t very smart and was reactionary. Within this diplomats hearing, they spoke about Putin ordering the closure of the school and datcha. This leaves no paper trail. The idiot diplomat then reports up the chain of command, and someone panicking over their children’s education calls a trusted CNN contact.
CNN being such a pillar of sound reporting fails to contact the Russian government for comment and publishes a bogus story. Then idiots at Politico and other mainstream sources publish their own “fake news” articles siting the CNN story as their sole source. In hours the story goes viral and it is tied directly to the Obama administrations aggressive anti-Russian behavior.
Then after several hours of hype, Russia comes out officially denying the story. With a simple statement by an official Russian spokesperson, Russia just succeeded in not only making Obama look like a deranged idiot, they completely discredit Fake News CNN.
Well played Russia. Well played.
As I said to my dad over the phone today, I had only seen the school closure story coming from one source, so I didn’t trust that it was true. Right after I got off the phone, I found the CNN story was a lie. Russia walked out of the boxing ring a little dinged up losing 35 assets in America. They are weakened in their spying capability because of it. With a little disinformation campaign, they succeeded in letting the Obama administration punch themselves in the face.
Written by: RNR Guest Blogger Michael F. Martin
Read more about Michael F. Martin, and more of his work, on his website http://www.michaelfmartin.com/about/
You would think Florida would be the last state that would welcome a Syrian Cleric who advocates the death penalty for homosexuals and holy war against Jews and those in the West. Apparently the Islamic Center of Pinellas County near Tampa, Florida has put the Pulse jihad attack behind them as they choose to invite this “world renown scholar” to speak January 6, 2017.
Syrian Sheikh Rateb Al-Nabulsi was welcomed by our State Department in 2014 to visit 17 different cities speaking and collecting money for the Syrian opposition to Assad. The Syrian American Council and Shaam Relief, partnered with the Muslim Brotherhood was integral in bringing him here to the US.
“All the Jewish people are combatant. They do not have a career that a military rank does not encounter: doctor, pilot, engineer, for example, is a tank commander. Every civilian citizen. They do not have a regular army; they have a reserve army, and all the people can fight, so this is essentially an entirely aggressive entity from A to Z. This is the Sharia ruling.”
According to the New York Post the State Department defended their decision to admit Al-Nabulsi as one of their officials reported that visa requests especially from countries that sponsor terror get scrutinized. One official stated,
“Every visa applicant undergoes a screening to detect connections to terrorism, and that includes inputs from multiple federal partners.”
If these screenings are any indication of the scrutiny of the Syrian refugees are receiving, Americans should be extremely concerned for their personal safety and the security of the country.
If they can fail so badly when they have multiple sources of background information at their disposal, what kind of assurance do the American people have that they are making wise decisions with NO background information at all on the refugees and immigrants being allowed in our country?
How can a State Department with access to these open-sourced videos and documents not make decisions in the best interest of the American people? Why does the State Department still extend an open and welcoming stance to a Syrian Cleric advocating for the death of homosexuals 8 months following an Islamic jihad attack on a gay bar in Orlando, Florida?
The answer is simple. We have been under the direction of an enemy in the White House.
Prior to the Pulse jihadi attack, Alan Kornman with The United West, brought another Muslim Cleric, Iranian Sheikh Sekaleshfar, to the attention of WFTV 9 News in Orlando. This man openly called for the killing of gays as the compassionate thing to do, and spoke in Sanford, Florida at the Husseini Islamic Center.
So, here we are once again having to swallow the absolute deception of a President Obama who speaks out of two sides of his mouth and a State Department that has become impotent when it comes to protecting this country. Obama sets the tone for his duplicitous manner when it comes to Islamic terrorism and gay rights.
On the one hand he drapes the White House in rainbow colors, appoints a gay man, Eric Fanning, for the Secretary of the Army and names Stonewall a National Monument for gay rights. On the other hand, he courts the Muslim Brotherhood/HAMAS by allowing hate-filled clerics like Al-Nabulsi and Sekaleshfar who advocate violence against gays, to come and whip up the Muslims attending these Mosques and Islamic Centers into carrying out more atrocities on the American people.
The good people of Florida need to speak up against the Islamization of their state and demand that clerics like Al-Nabulsi turn right back around and go back to where they came from.
It is time for a new Secretary of State to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and all those front groups associated with them as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Only then will our law enforcement be able to root them out and put a stop to the sponsoring of jihad promoting clerics and Imams from spreading their ideology of hate.
- Al-Nabulsi Event Flyer: The Islamic Society of Pinellas County, “An Evening for Syria Dr. Mohammed Al-NabulsiMasjid Ebad Alrahman (904) 704-4381
- Friday, January 6, 2017 at 7:30pm
Ask nearly any representative or senator serving in the U.S. Congress his or her opinion of term limits and you will most likely get the same response: “Term limits aren’t necessary. It’s up to the voters to decide how long a person serves in office.” Ah, if it were only that simple.
President-elect Donald Trump, in his Contract With The American Voter, pledged that on his first day in office, he would propose a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress. What a fantastic idea. And long overdue. The problem, of course, is getting such an amendment ratified.
On the surface, the knee-jerk response of these politicians that term limits aren’t necessary because “it’s up to the voters” sounds reasonable. After all, here in America – the world’s preeminent “democracy” (actually, a representative republic) – U.S. citizens of legal age have the right to vote and in exercising that right, decide collectively who they wish to represent them at all levels of government. So, from an intuitive perspective, there is nothing wrong with sending the same politician back to Congress term after term if that is the electorate’s will. The problem, of course, is that what is intuitive doesn’t always match what is reality.
Many members of Congress have a knack for getting elected and not much else. Most often these are the glad-handers – affectionately or derisively known as the “good-ole boys” (and girls). Armed with a permanent smile and an effervescent “never met a stranger” personality, these politicians win re-election cycle after cycle, not because of their legislative talents, but rather because of their singular ability to get people to like them and, therefore, to vote for them. As most voting is emotion-based, it is a reliable formula.
Once in office, there is the power of incumbency which, in a nutshell, is based in the fact that voters like to vote for a winner and having already won at least one election, the incumbent is most often viewed as just that, a winner. Of course, there is from time to time a wave of anti-incumbency, however, most congressional incumbents are able to schmooze their way through this occasional annoyance only to win re-election again, and again, until, ultimately, they become that dirtiest of all four-letter words – a career politician.
The problem with this system, which appears democratic on the surface, is that it tends ultimately – in the case of career politicians as least – to be anything but democratic. Why? One simple reason – the accumulation of power.
The longer a member of Congress stays in office, generally speaking, the more difficult it is for a newcomer to defeat him or her due to the simple fact of the power of incumbency. Further, the longer a member of Congress stays in office, in most cases, the larger his or her war chest becomes with regard to campaign finances. Of course, money isn’t everything in politics, just almost everything. Anyone who knows anything about campaigning knows that the person with the most money to spend has the best chance of winning, all other things being equal. Still further, the longer a member of Congress stays in office, the more likely he or she is to earn a powerful legislative position which tends to further insulate him or her from an effective challenge.
If the point of a democracy (or, rather, a representative republic) is to empower the voters, then such self-sustaining concentrations of power are antithetical to the essence of the “one person, one vote” concept of fair and effective self-government. Even Congress, itself, along with most state legislatures once realized the folly of allowing certain politicians to become entrenched in government by proposing and ratifying the 22nd Amendment limiting the president to two terms – this after President Franklin Roosevelt appeared determined to remain president forever or, well, at least until he died (which, of course, he managed to do).
If President-elect Trump keeps his promise to the American people to propose, on his first day in office, an amendment instituting term limits on members of Congress, he will have done something truly historic. If members of Congress support ratification of the amendment by the state legislatures, they will have done something beyond historic – they will have done their duty.