Thursday, November 10, 2016

The Collectivists Are Revolting... But Funny

Much to the collective disappointment of the media and pundits, the election was over almost as soon as the polls closed on the East Coast. They did their best to resist calling states that were obviously Trump wins, and pulled the trigger quite quickly on any state that even appeared a Clinton possibility. It did not matter. Trump still won in decisive fashion, even if the media made sure most of America was already asleep before he got to speak to the nation.

After months of being fed rigged polls, Clinton supporters were rightly shocked. Even worse were the irrational fears brought on by the almost demonic behavior of the media and Clinton towards not only Donald Trump, but anyone who would even consider voting for him. In light of the hysteria, its best to remind everyone that Trump is where he stands today, precisely because Clinton and her allies made sure he was the GOP nominee. They gave him billions in free media, and alternated between attacks and indifference towards any primary threat. They built the monster, but could not destroy it in the end.

Now its time for the weeping and gnashing of teeth. The histrionics and toddler tantrums, a staple of American collectivism, never ceases to amuse. I especially enjoyed this meme.

Look at it in all its glory. A vote for Trump in some way is detrimental to all these folks. The creator of this meme never takes a moment to consider one very important point. Only the left divides people. They thrive on division and strife, never wanting to see people as just simply - AMERICANS.

Against All Enemies Foreign And Domestic: Let's consider one critical national issue carefully. On 9/11, did the Saudi terrorists take a roll call to make sure they were only targeting Christian white males? No. They crashed their planes killing people from every walk of life, every religion, every race, and every division the left could imagine. They weren't even targeting just Americans, as 372 foreign nationals were murdered that day, including a few Muslims.

Since the attack on September 11th, 139 Americans have been killed in 48 separate acts related to Islamic terror or Islam-related honor killing in the United States.  God only knows how many have been prevented by law enforcement, or botched by the terrorists themselves. It was just a few months ago that the son of a Hillary supporter, Omar Mateen, walked into Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando, and murdered 49 people and wounded 53 others in a terrorist attack. It would seem that islamic radicals don't seem to care if you are female, black, LGBT or whatever you imagine yourself to be.

Islam is the enemy we face today both here and abroad. Islamic dominated countries routinely murder gays, infidels, their own wives and children, and even other Muslims who don't believe as they do. Do we really want to import even more of that barbarism here? If you are concerned about the supposed rape culture on campus, check out what unrestricted immigration has done for rape in Sweden and  throughout Europe.

Because I love LIBERTY, I cannot support a candidate who has taken millions of dollars from countries who support terrorism and the spread of Islam. Because I LOVE my friends, I voted for the candidate who sees the risk in importing thousands of potentially dangerous people who would rape or kill you, no matter what group you call home. Compassion for the innocent needs to be balanced by commonsense. One the first responsibilities of POTUS is to defend this nation from enemies both foreign and domestic. If the intelligence community struggles to identify home grown islamic radicals, how are they going to successfully screen thousands of potential enemy combatants posing as refugees?

According to Pew research, Muslims represent about 4 to 8 percent of the population in Western European nations. Violent agitation is a way of life in several countries as they rarely adopt the cultural norms of their new home. Instead, they demand that Sharia law, the 7th century barbarism of the Middle East, be imposed in Europe. There is also a willingness to provide support for violent jihad in their adopted home.

In a survey commissioned by Channel 4 of UK Muslims, 4% sympathize with suicide bombers or see it as a viable form of protest. That's a potential talent pool of 100,000 suicide bombers. And speaking of that LGBT friend, 52% of UK muslims surveyed want to ban homosexuality. What does ban mean? Well, in more than few islamic countries it means death.

ALL AMERICANS matter to me, and voters like me. It is for that very reason we supported the only reasonable alternative to save the Republic from this growing threat.

Regime Change

The establishment in both parties have had multiple chances to get this country headed in the right direction. Since both have proven incapable of substantive and positive change, maybe its time to try something different? If your choices continue to be either hump or death, maybe its time for regime change?

Don't consider Islam a real threat? Take any issue and let's compare the two candidates. 

Does granting citizenship and benefits to illegal aliens help any citizen? No. It means jobs are taken, wages go down, and taxes go up to pay for all the free benefits handed out to these new citizens. Plus, the added bonus of school and prison overcrowding, higher insurance premiums, more crime and on and on. How does that help your friends? Uncontrolled immigration helps nobody.

How does higher energy prices help any of these disappointed groups? Last I checked, we all endure the same misery at the pump and on our energy bills.

Raising taxes has never stimulated an economy or created jobs. With roughly half the population already idle, how does putting even more people out of work through bigger government and unrestricted immigration help anyone?

Abortion murders minorities and females at disproportionate rates. How does making it even easier to kill a child even up until birth help anyone from these groups? 

Obama and Clinton have created the refugee crisis by attacking and encouraging rebellion throughout the Middle East. In the process, they helped arm what would become ISIS. So, much of the problems facing this planet can be traced to their foreign policy blunders. And yet the left thinks she is the solution?

Maybe its time my LGBT+, Female, Black, Latino/a, Muslim friends stop with their tribal, or collectivist outlook, and start looking out for the only nation on the planet that offers them any hope of individual Liberty. Collective rights deprive the individual of their Liberty. The moment you divide the nation by color, class, religion, or sexual appetite, you have introduced division that leads to conflict - something Marxists encourage. The rights of the individual will always be trampled by the group. However, Liberty is colorblind and benefits everyone equally, especially the individual who does not fall for groupthink, collectivism, or the tribalism found in the rest of the world. In the United States, you can truly be free. Let's keep it that way.

And there was only one candidate who spoke in support of Liberty. And it sure wasn't the career politician on the ballot.

Final Thoughts

All over America, special snowflakes and social justice warriors are hurting. Classes are being cancelled, and people are gathering to discuss their feelings about this election. In fact, at the Twin Cities campus of the University of Minnesota, Katrice Albert, the Vice President for Equity and Diversity, thought it necessary to send out a letter to comfort her little minions.

While there is no expiration date for the raw emotion many are feeling, we will continue to work diligently toward a campus climate that supports respect and inclusive excellence as we work across our differences. I say “we” because none of this work happens in isolation; it requires time and effort from all of us. As famed poet June Jordan said, “We are the ones we have been waiting for.” We can only transform and enrich our institution by learning from one another, working in partnership, and continuing to find ways to positively contribute to our campus community.


We know we live in difficult times — not just here, but across our country and world. We want the University of Minnesota to be an environment where bridges are built to respectfully connect our many communities. That begins with each of us and all of us. Please join us in this critical effort.

When I imagine hard times, I think of what my parents endured. Both were raised on farms during the depression. They got up before sunrise, milked cows, plowed the fields, walked to school, and repeated those same chores when they came home. If you did not work, you did not eat. Then both, while not any older than these distraught muffins, served their country during a World War.

My father fought his way through North Africa, up the Italian peninsula and into Southern France, and then finally into Germany. He was one of 5 boys who would serve their country from the same farm family. Add in two more uncles from my Mother's side of the family, and that made 7.

My Mother, who had attempted to start college, instead postponed those plans. She went to work at Tinker Air Force Base doing what she could for the war effort working on B-29 bombers.

Thousands of folks have done the same in times of national emergency, both before and after World War 2.

This country has been very Blessed. We have enjoyed far more peace than war, far more prosperity than poverty. And we have not seen a foreign enemy on our shores since Japan briefly occupied the Aleutians.

There is absolutely nothing about this time, this nation, or this election that constitutes "difficult times". The mollycoddling of this generation will make sure they will be absolutely unprepared when faced with actual difficult times. The very fact that there are universities out there who have Vice Presidents for Equity and Diversity babysitting children instead of preparing adults for the real world, demonstrates how far we have fallen.

President Trump is exactly what this country needs. Along with a swift kick in the butt for all these special snowflakes.

I guess there is a Pauline Fleming at every school.

America needs a little more George Patton, and far less Pauline Fleming.


Monday, October 10, 2016

Don't Like Trump? Blame The DNC And Their Partners In The Media

Democrats and the state run media have NO business complaining about Trump's behavior now, or in the past. Why? Because they are largely responsible for his nomination. Observe.

It has been estimated that between 10-12 million Democrats (38%) voted in the Republican primary, generally in open primaries and in the early months, when they could most influence the outcome in Trump's favor. Some were certainly voting FOR him, unwilling to support the despicable Comrade Clinton. Others had a more nefarious motive - to prevent any of the truly Conservative Republican candidates from getting the nomination. There were at least four candidates who would have presented a stark contrast, and a clear Conservative alternative, to the Alinsky-trained, anti-American Marxist in her ill-fitting Chairman Mao pantsuits.

The state run media was also complicit. As the NY Times reported in March 2016, Trump benefited from nearly $2 BILLION in free media. This was more than ALL Republican candidates combined to that point in the race, and about equal to Sanders and Clinton's combined numbers. The numbers only increased as candidates dropped out of the race, likely topping $3 Billion by the end of the GOP primary. You can attribute some of this to Trump's ability to drive the narrative. However, if the media TRULY did not want Trump as the nominee, it would not have been so OBVIOUSLY in his corner.

Consider the way Ted Cruz was treated by the media after Iowa. Cruz made the correct, and principled stand on ethanol subsidies and won big. But somehow, the media turned it into a strong showing for Marco Rubio. And then later, a victory stolen from Carson's floundering campaign, an issue Trump championed to cover his own poor showing in the state. The media continued to downplay any success that threatened their choice throughout the GOP primary. They were ALL IN for Trump. 

The Clinton campaign had assumed all along that Trump was the weakest of the bunch and encouraged their friends in the media, and their minions in the field, to help Trump secure the nomination. Once nominated, it was time to prop up their deadbeat candidate, and tear down Trump. There is some truth to the assumption of weakness. He is by no means a principled Conservative. Any reasonable Conservative candidate would make Clinton look silly on the campaign trail, especially when it came to contrasting the Conservative vision of Liberty, with the radical left's nightmare of tyranny. 

However, Trump does possess some intangibles that Conservative candidates generally do not. He has a fearlessness in the face of the state run media monopoly. The average GOP politician wilts under the pressure of lights and cameras, forgetting any sliver of Conservatism that might have at one time inspired them to run for higher office. Trump enters debates knowing that not only is he facing the dim-witted Clinton, but also hostile moderators, dirty tricks by the crew, and a left-leaning army in entertainment and social media to continue the onslaught.

The Clinton campaign had hoped to paint Conservatism as extreme, and Trump as the GOP nominee, as too dangerous for America. The reality is that most Americans are rejecting the extremism of the left, and establishment politics in general. And unfortunately for Clinton, she is the poster child for pandering establishment politicians. Her whole life has revolved around obtaining power and robbing the treasury. If she actually believed her ridiculous campaign rhetoric, she couldn't vote for herself!

It is amazing that such an utterly pathetic candidate is the very best the DNC could muster. She is SO BAD, they had to orchestrate a takeover of the GOP primary to find SOMEONE Hillary might beat. That is truly comical.

EVERYONE knows Trump is no angel. So this latest faux outrage is laughable. 

If you are upset by some salty language spoken 11 years ago, SURELY you would DEMAND that Clinton drop out of the race for enabling and covering for Bill Clinton's nearly 50 year reign of terror as a sexual predator. How many more women have to physically and emotionally suffer at the hands of these two? 

Do you REALLY want Bill prowling around the White House again as FROTUS - First Rapist of the United States? 

Do you really want a woman who was willing to intimidate and shame his victims into silence to have the power of the presidency? This same woman, in Stalin-like fashion, obtained nearly 1,000 FBI files of her political enemies and kept files of anyone she perceived to be a threat. Both the Clintons and the party have used the IRS, the media, and the courts as weapons to harass, jail, and bankrupt people who oppose them. Is that the kind of leader you desire in the White House for the next 4 years?

America can and will do much better than that.

Monday, June 27, 2016

A Modest GOP Convention Proposal

Steve Deace had great idea. Writing in Conservative Review he suggested that Donald Trump agree to unbound the delegates and let them freely decide who will be the GOP nominee. It would be the chance of a lifetime for Donald Trump to show he truly understands how to make a deal, and prove he is not just some reality TV star.

Frankly, I think its a brilliant idea. Let Donald Trump make his case as to why he is the best candidate to lead the GOP directly to the delegates chosen by the Republican rank and file. If he wins a simple majority, my support changes from ambivalent to mildly enthusiastic. Right now, I am stuck with a choice between two New York progressives with almost identical beliefs, and the one I'm supposed to support was propped up by $2 billion of fawning mainstream media support and tons of Democrat voters in select primary states who absolutely do not support a Conservative vision for America.

The total amount of free media was astounding for the reality TV star, considering his total ($2 Billion) was almost equal to the entire field of both parties ($2.2 Billion). And he doubled the total for all the GOP candidates combined. Ted Cruz was a very distant second place at $313 million. You normally do not see that level of water carrying from the mainstream media for GOP candidates. But that is just one small aspect of the Trump Putsch. Consider the tone and timing of their coverage. When Cruz "unexpectedly" won in Iowa, the story was not his brave, principled stand on Ethanol, his strong ground game, or even his big victory over Trump and the establishment, it was how well Rubio performed by landing in 3rd freakin' place! ABC news breathlessly told us about Rubio, “Rarely has a third-place finish felt so much like a victory.”

And then it became the big lie that Cruz stole the election from poor little "wash day, nothing clean" Ben Carson. The fact that Carson contributed to the continuation of that nonsense has forever tainted my opinion of the doctor. In fact, the behavior of several folks in the GOP throughout this ordeal has been quite revealing. Then came the convenient hit pieces at just the right time to check any positive Cruz momentum. It was almost as if the state-run media WANTED Trump to be the GOP nominee. How odd is that?

Then we have the primaries. Democrats have been strategically manipulating GOP primaries for years. In Texas, the GOP almost doubled the number of primary voters in 2016. In 2012, there were 9 on the ballot, but it was effectively decided Romney was the anointed one. Only 1.4 million even bothered to vote. Compare that with the 2.8 million this year. Do you really think that huge increase was all GOP voters? Maybe this year was just a wee bit different than previous years with 14 folks on the ballot, 3 serious contenders, and others with no hope simply taking votes? In 2008, with 11 on the ballot, but effectively a two person race (Huckabee and McCain), so only 1.3 million votes were cast. Sanders had no chance in Texas, so Democrat voters were free to interfere with the 2016 GOP primary. In 2008, the DNC had 2.8 million voting in the primary. This year only 1.4 voted. Did they all stay home?

And remember this, MULTIPLE media outlets breathlessly told us Cruz was in trouble, and that Trump may win in Texas. After every vote was counted, Cruz won 43.75% of the total vote, beating Trump by almost 500,000 votes - (1,239,158 to 757,489). Even with the huge influx of primary voters, Trump managed a PALTRY 27% of the vote. Setting Cruz votes aside, more votes were cast for ANYONE other than Trump - (837,154). But the net result was that Trump and the GOP dwarves kept Cruz from getting over 50% and a dominating victory. This allowed the media to spin it as a setback for Cruz, and somehow a good showing by Rubio and Trump, rather than a harbinger of how weak Trump was in solid Conservative states.

And now for the obligatory music break.

Which brings us back to the proposal. If the delegates, those REPUBLICANS selected to pick our nominee, can with a clear conscience support Trump, all opposition within the party should be silenced, and we all work together to send the spawn of satan back to Hell, Arkansas, or even better prison. Assuming Trump has all this enthusiastic support within the GOP, he should win by a landslide in Cleveland. But please, let's not allow the media and DNC shenanigans pick yet another nominee for us.

BTW - I absolutely do not think this will ever happen.

Sunday, June 26, 2016

Wolves In Sheep's Clothing recently posted a brief article about an executive advisor to the World Evangelical Alliance who has come forward and publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton. How can anyone, especially someone who claims to be a follower of Christ, openly endorse a candidate that not only encourages infanticide, but sees absolutely nothing wrong with people of faith being forced to pay for it? And with Clinton, that is just the tip of the massive iceberg of the many, many reasons she is unfit for office. One could make a solid case that Donald Trump is not a strong candidate, as I have, but his future is still uncertain. We KNOW where Clinton stands on every issue, and where the proverbial and literal bodies are buried.

But this post is not necessarily about politics. It is about how large religious organizations go from being followers of Christ, to being perverted by the enemy. You see it in large denominations all the time, who have slowly succumbed to preaching nothing more than a social gospel. The denomination I grew up in, where my grandfather was a circuit riding preacher, is being split apart by people who want to reimagine God's Truth. How is this possible? Simple, they forget God's most basic command - Preach the Word. Without the Living Word, God's Incorruptible Seed as the foundation, everything else crumbles. It was to the religious leadership of His time that Jesus gave the strongest rebukes - This people honour me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching [as their] teachings commandments of men. (From Mark 7:6-7 Darby)

I was not familiar with the WEA, so I did some quick research. They are based in New York - a red flag, have lots of meetings, and raise cash from the religiously gullible around the world. Some of their efforts may be noteworthy - for instance stopping human trafficking. But most of their work falls in line with the global socialist agenda - redistribution of wealth, climate change, global governance. Although they carefully rename everything to fool the ignorant. The global warming nonsense becomes creation care for instance, as if God needs help in this area. It amazes me that people who claim to know God think Him incapable of anticipating anything the people HE created might do on the Earth HE spoke into existence.

I stumbled across this little nugget on behalf of the 2015 Global Warming gathering of fruits, nuts, and flakes in Paris. Read this carefully

As leading evangelicals engaged in addressing the issues of poverty, creation care and climate change, we welcome the Paris Agreement signed on Saturday 12 December 2015. For the first time in history, the world has a global climate change deal where almost every nation on earth has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and has agreed to pursue efforts to keep global average temperature rise below 1.5 degrees C.
Alongside these actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions we welcome the reaffirmation by the world’s richest countries to provide US$100 billion in climate finance per year from 2020 to help the world’s poorest communities (for whom we have a particular concern). These funds will help developing countries to adapt to the impact of climate change and transition to clean energy themselves.
I must have missed that verse in Scripture where Jesus commanded us to take from the rich and give to the poor. And there is certainly no verse advocating one world governance. After all, for Believers, there is only one Head of the Body, something the WEA has apparently forgotten in their zeal for good works over the Word. Believers live by sowing and reaping, not by stealing and squandering - which will always be the result of big government redistribution. Bad things happen when government, no matter what form it takes - UN, EU, US Congress, or even religion, stands between Believers and Jesus Christ.

If the Holy Spirit tells me to send money to a ministry, or give to an individual, its gone without a second thought. That is SEED SOWN, and according to God's Word, I know there will be a bountiful harvest along with the Blessing intended by God for the recipient. Money confiscated by force and laundered through government organizations is consumed by the enemy and wasted. You might as well flush it down the toilet. And it certainly doesn't do squat to change the global climate.

Rather than rehash in this post the absurdity of the global warming religion, you can see some of my other posts on this subject here, and also this post - Green is the new Gospel.

A Senior US State Department Official says, “the faith community has been essential in making the case that confronting climate change is our moral responsibility...".

NO. Our MORAL responsibility is to make sure people are FREE. Free to speak their mind, worship as they choose, defend their lives and property, live in the peace and prosperity promised in the Word. That is impossible when government ne'er-do-wells want to micromanage every aspect of their lives in some vain attempt to control the climate.

The world is moving away from statism and globalism, as the BREXIT vote demonstrates. Mankind OUGHT TO BE FREE, not ruled by distant unelected bureaucrats even if they claim some religious endorsement. Impoverishing people further by refusing them the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of industrialization, reliable power and transportation for instance, guarantees generational dependence. Financing poverty leads to more misery. Eradicating opportunities for economic growth means unending, hopelessness, as you are telling people they can't make it without your help, and preventing them from even trying. Its diabolical.

Why not teach people how to believe rather than beg? Why not share a vision of prosperity, rather than perpetuate the nightmare of poverty? Why not give hope, instead of just more religious despair? Why not sow the Seed that grows faith, and let the people reap a plentiful harvest, enjoying the Grace of God? Only the Word can set people free from bondage. It all starts with someone willing to proclaim the Liberty found in the Living Word.

But thou shalt remember the LORD thy God: for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth, that he may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers, as it is this day. -- Deuteronomy 8:18 (KJV)

The tongue of the just is as choice silver: the heart of the wicked is little worth. The lips of the righteous feed many: but fools die for want of wisdom. The blessing of the LORD, it maketh rich, and he addeth no sorrow with it. -- Proverbs 10:20-22 (KJV)

What the WEA should be doing is teaching the Word. Demand Liberty for the people, so they can prosper and NOT be dependent on others. Introduce them to their Heavenly Father so they will be complete in Christ, and connected to an Eternal source that will NEVER fail. Let the Holy Spirit and God's Wisdom inspire and unleash the creative ability in every Believer. Instead, it seriously seems that many within these global religious organizations prefer to see people struggling, rather than overcoming and victorious as God sees them. And that is the absolute worst form of arrogance, especially from those who claim they follow Jesus.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. -- Matthew 7:15-20 (KJV)

I want people to be successful, prosperous, free from both political AND religious bondage. I want them to enjoy ALL that God has given them. Jesus came that you may have and enjoy LIFE, and have it in abundance, to the full, till it overflows. Its satan who comes to steal, kill, and destroy. (John 10:10) If the WEA supports global redistribution, one world government, and keeping people hopeless and in poverty, they are bound by the philosophy and traditions of men, and have forgotten the Liberty that comes in Christ.

And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.
For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the steadfastness of your faith in Christ.
As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:
Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: -- Colossians 2:4-10 (KJV)

Thursday, June 23, 2016

Can We Place Progressive Politicians and Musicians On A Secret List?

Like irrational toddlers, Congress critters stage a sit-in, musicians craft an open letter to Congress, and like clockwork, the radical agenda of the gun grabbing progressives marches forward.

The latest attempt by the extreme left to undermine Liberty is the notion that gun sales should be restricted to those on the no fly list. At first blush, it sounds like a reasonable accommodation, maybe even a "commonsense" solution. But who exactly is on the list, and how do they get there? Is it just foreign radicals, known jihadists from around the globe intent to go Aloha Snackbar in yet another gun-free zone? If only this were true.

As many have discovered, the DHS no fly list seems to struggle at determining who the bad guys are and who aren't. Some people are added and are never able to find out why, much less get their names removed. What happened to due process? What about the presumption of innocence?

The occupiers in Washington claim this approach is necessary to stop gun violence. It has been proven time and again that criminals rarely obey the law when it comes to acquiring their weapons. Even in cities with the strictest gun laws, criminals have little trouble finding the right tools to carry out their attacks. Chicago, with its draconian gun laws, is nothing more than city of future victims, clocking 12 murders and 54 shootings over Father's Day weekend alone. They are on pace for almost 600 murders and over 3,000 shooting victims in 2016. Does anyone seriously think adding a Chicago gang member to a list that keeps him from buying a gun will stop the war being waged on Chicago's streets? Its idiocy of the highest order. At the very least, arm the citizens so they have a fighting chance.

Even if it were possible to seize every weapon in a country, terrorism will still flourish. If not with illegally obtained guns, instead it would be with knives, pressure cookers, cars or even box cutters and pepper spray. If the enemy is motivated by a religion that glorifies murder, promising a heavenly whorehouse as a reward, no list will ever stop the attacks. And if our very own government refuses to name the source of the problem, how could they possibly identify those who might belong on such a list?

Instead, our very own Department of Homeland Security is too busy preparing to fight people who, reject "federal authority in favor of state or local authority." Those 10th Amendment supporting folks are a scary bunch. Don't forget those, "individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration." If only I had a nickle for every pro life protester who has gone on a shooting rampage. The DHS report identifies anyone who opposes Obama as potential extremists, and even insults veterans by calling them potential terrorists.

Everything sounds like "commonsense" until it passes - the devil is always in the details. One man's terrorist "no fly list" soon becomes the next administration's political enemy hit list. This current administration authorized the outright persecution by the IRS of TEA Party and Conservative groups - often no more than mothers and wives from small town America trying to make a difference.

If this is what the government does to law abiding citizens in rural Alabama, what will they do to those who are more outspoken? Will they find themselves denied their 2nd Amendment Right because some other unelected bureaucrat like Lois Lerner seeks to punish those who believe differently than the party in power?

elephant in the room
There have been numerous examples of government bureaucrats and their media shills labeling 2nd Amendment supporters, Christians, veterans, and people who support freedom in any form, as possible terrorists, while doing their best to ignore and excuse the proverbial elephant in the room. The SPLC includes Christian ministries, pro Israel groups, and Conservative groups on its absurd "hate watch" list. Since government is dominated by the radical left, who seem disinterested in actual terrorist threats, who would you trust to manage such a list?

If both the NRA and the progressive ACLU share concerns over the whole notion, it just might be a bad idea.

When the organization that is supposedly tasked with preventing terrorism continues to chase mythical enemies, while ignoring the ones already active worldwide, you know America is in trouble.

Member Acevedo (Austin, TX Police Chief) reminded the Council that the threat from right wing extremists domestically is just as real as the threat from Islamic extremism. (DHS) Secretary Johnson agreed and noted that CVE, by definition, is not solely focused on one religion. Member Goldenberg seconded Member Acevedo’s remarks and noted the importance of online sites in right wing extremist
communities, not only in America but worldwide.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Homeland Security Advisory Council

Open Session
The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars 
January 21, 2016  

I would love for someone to point out even 5 terrorist attacks by "right-wing" extremists in the last 20 years. Because if they are truly a threat, they sure are keeping a very low profile. There is one group that continues to rack up a massive body count, and it certainly is not Christians or Conservatives. And just to be fair, once we exclude a certain religion of peace, why is it that nearly every violent nutcase is a public school educated lefty? If DHS was serious about our safety, they would simply put all progressives on their magical list.

Here are some "commonsense" solutions. Enforce the laws already on the books. If you are elected to office in the Federal government, don't arm criminals or support global terrorism. Keep violent criminals behind bars. Enforce immigration laws, denying entry to violent illegal aliens, and deporting those already here who fill the prisons to capacity. Screen all immigrants carefully, especially those from countries that have shown an unwillingness to discourage violent beliefs. Prosecute and/or deport all those who engage in preaching violence - this includes especially extremists on the left who are far more prone to violence. And finally, those people who are mentally ill, and a danger to themselves and others, must be addressed. Since many of these hold elected office in DC, it will be tricky to get them institutionalized and the help they so obviously need.

I have a passion for this issue because I love Liberty. And I oppose everyone who attempts to undermine it in anyway, even out of ignorance. The Founders were passionate about gun ownership because they knew the history of tyranny, many having firsthand experience with their natural rights being denied at the whims of the powerful. Don't let people, who for nefarious reasons, want to con you into conceding just a wee bit more of your Liberty for false promises of more security.

If gun ownership, free speech, free exercise of faith, protection from illegal search or seizure are all NATURAL, GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS, then even if you are a minority of ONE, NO vote, NO politician, NO mob, and not even any laughable "commonsense" solutions progressives dream up can deny any citizen those rights. Relinquish even one inch of Liberty to those in power at your own peril.

The Founders knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote our Constitution.

"Resistance to sudden violence, for the preservation not only of my person, my limbs, and life, but of my property, is an indisputable right of nature which I have never surrendered to the public by the compact of society, and which perhaps, I could not surrender if I would." (John Adams, Boston Gazette, Sept. 5, 1763, reprinted in The Works of John Adams 438 [Charles F. Adams ed., 1851])

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. " (Noah Webster, "An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution," 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56 [New York, 1888])

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 [Univ. of Alabama Press,1975])

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed ― unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (The Federalist, No. 46 at 243- 244)

Madison Library


Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Trump's New York City Values

Born and raised in New York City, Donald Trump lives and breathes progressive politics, crony capitalism, and the typical union corruption found in major metro areas in the Northeast. Its not surprising that connecting with Conservatives in the Midwest would be difficult. He even at one point dismissed Iowa with a resentful question, “How stupid are the people of Iowa?

It was in Iowa that his "New York values" entered the campaign. I might have narrowed it to #NYCvalues, because it is in the city where this most definitely applies. Trump feigned umbrage, and tried to explain away the values comments as insulting first responders and victims of 9/11. And just like the "stole the election" claims do not resonate with most folks, everyone with half a brain understood what is meant by New York values. In fact, Trump explained it for us in an interview in 1999.


In Trump's own words, his values differ GREATLY from the rest of the country. They reflect where he lives, and are so far to the left, he could be an ideological twin of Hillary Clinton. It is why he has made numerous donations to Democrats over the years, including checks to Hillary. Many people can and do evolve in their political beliefs, recognizing Right from wrong, and Good from evil. Normally, this is done by their late 20s, not in their 60s. And while Trump's views on key issues change daily depending on the audience he is addressing, it doesn't take much imagination to anticipate what is truly in his heart. Can someone so nurtured by progressive thought be trusted when it comes to religious Liberty, shrinking the government, protecting the innocent in the womb, following the Constitution, or simply being honest with Americans?

History says, that like Texas weather, you just wait 15 minutes and Trump's positions or party affiliation will likely change. He has changed parties at least 5 times, and threatens to run as an independent if he feels the GOP is unfair to him. Considering his fragile ego, that is probably a very low threshold.

NBC News has compiled a fairly comprehensive list of his campaign flip flops. Just on the abortion issue alone, you see Trump's "evolution" is ongoing, holding multiple contradictory positions over just a few days! (See videos at both links)

Why is this important? Americans need to know what the man stands for if he is elected. You cannot have a President that sticks his tiny fingers to the wind, or takes a poll, for every decision. Americans must be confident that the ship is not rudderless, tossed to and fro on the waves of his volatile emotions. As The Word tells us, a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8) And we need stability in Washington now more than anything else.

I believe National Review, and Ted Cruz at the Wisconsin town hall, made astute observations regarding Trump's answers to various questions on issues like abortion. He answers the way he THINKS Conservatives would answer. Listen carefully to the words he uses and how he fishes for what he believes Conservatives MIGHT want to hear.

At times, his responses seem reasonable, but more often than not, they sound like they are written for an SNL skit mocking Conservatives. There is no deep thinking on the ethical, moral, Constitutional, or even Spiritual reasons why murdering babies is wrong. Trump's knee-jerk response is that society should punish women who have abortions. Is this a well thought out, reasonable, or even Conservative approach? Or is it because that is what he THINKS Conservatives want to hear? Same thing with the wall, immigration, trade, or any issue. His answers are rarely founded on Constitutional principles, Christian morality, economic reality, or even Conservative values.

Its interesting that Trump would use the word "punish" with regard to abortion. Yet another progressive candidate not too far back saw pregnancy as a punishment of women. Such is the distorted reasoning and spiritual darkness of the left.

Now take a listen to Ted Cruz discussing the same issue with someone who is for abortion. Note the reasonableness of his answer, that is built on a foundation of faith, rule of law, commonsense, and the Constitution. Which candidate has a better grasp of the importance of protecting life, and how best to legally and morally approach this very important issue as POTUS?

And that is just one issue, albeit a very important one that separates the wheat from the chaff. The same case could be made for building a wall. There is already legislation in place to build a border wall. But the wall itself is just one tactic in the greater struggle to manage America's borders and halt illegal immigration. There must be a willingness to enforce the law throughout the country. Law enforcement and immigration must be willing to deport those who are here illegally. The next President must be willing to deploy all resources necessary to do the job properly. The administration must listen to the men in the trenches, and give them the latitude and support to complete the mission. What might be best in Arizona, might not be effective in the Rio Grande Valley. But as in the link above, no bureaucracy or city must stand in the way of stopping the invasion along our Southern border.

As a candidate, if you truly do not believe that illegal immigration is a problem, that flooding the country with unskilled labor is desirable, a 50 foot wall will be a complete waste of resources. Or, for the hardcore progressive, the wall could just as easily be built to keep Americans from fleeing tyranny.

What is in the heart of the candidate matters. The current progressive in the White House has ignored the Constitution, used the IRS to attack political opponents, selectively enforced the law, and made up the rules as he went along. Donald Trump is just another progressive, who is arrogant enough to believe that he could be a better tyrant than Obama. He desires power not to make America great again - something NO politician can ever do, but rather a selfish lust for power. That in a nutshell is New York City values - the strong, rich, and powerful make the rules. And in progressive New York, intolerance for the views of others reigns supreme.

The Republican Party candidates are running against the SAFE Act — it was voted for by moderate Republicans who run the Senate! Their problem is not me and the Democrats; their problem is themselves. Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are. -- Governor Andrew Cuomo, New York

NYC progressives buy votes by promising handouts, raise taxes until they chase away all productive citizens, and then still insist on micromanaging every aspect of life. Is NYC, the progressive Utopia where Donald Trump was raised and celebrates, the model he will apply to the nation as President? Has he EVER stood up to the ever expanding bureaucracy, always increasing taxes, and general corruption of his hometown, or even state? What makes any thinking person believe Trump will change his stripes in Washington?

George Washington presiding the Philadelphia Convention
New York City values are inconsistent with Conservatism, and what our Founding Fathers put in place. I don't want MY progressive in the White House. I want someone who is a Christian, someone guided by Truth, and a Constitutional Conservative, someone who will follow the Constitution and reign in the abuse and growth of government under the progressive leadership of the past. Donald Trump is not, and will never be that man.

Ben Shapiro - Everyone Knows What 'New York Values' Are, So Stop Bitching

Monday, March 28, 2016

Ted Cruz - The Ultimate Ladies Man

In order for this National Enquirer story about Ted Cruz to have legs, there must be a significant suspension of disbelief. Observe.

1. Ted has lived in DC over 3 years now. Everyone claims that nobody likes Ted. It is said that he is the most hated man in Washington. He was surrounded by colleagues who would do anything to undermine him. DC is full of hostile media always digging for dirt, especially on Conservative politicians. AND the current administration has almost infinite surveillance capabilities, and a knack for destroying their political enemies. With ALL that against him, there was not a single shred of evidence uncovered UNTIL Ted became a serious threat, and then, as if by magic, it just so happened Trump's longtime friend at the National Enquirer gets the scoop?

2. Pundits and bloggers have written that Ted is a geek and ugly. He has been unfavorably compared to Grandpa from the Munsters. So the NE story claims this "nerdy" and "unattractive" man gets to Washington and becomes the ultimate ladies man? I know his hands are much larger than Trump's freakishly small hands, but is that really enough to make the women come running to Ted?

3. How many women on this planet would be sexually aroused by someone who memorizes the Constitution?

Obligatory Music Break - Featuring Finnish Pop Star Jenni Vartiainen, and her song Nettin, about being maliciously exposed to the public on the Internet.

4. People in Congress are always surrounded by aides, constituents, media, strategists, lobbyists, security, and a host of other people who come and go in DC. Is it possible that a Congress Critter could have an affair - absolutely. Is it possible for a Conservative Senator from Texas, who is hated by EVERYONE, to carry out 5 in three years without ANYONE in the mainstream press or either party EVER discovering and disclosing it?  In this day and age, its highly doubtful. Even an editor from the left-leaning Texas Monthly is incredulous.

5. Note that it was not just one affair reported, but 5. Why 5? Why not 11, or 27? If you are going to lie, why not go full Trump whopper? This is classic sleazeball progressive politics, combined with reality TV-inspired flair by Donald Trump. Remember - its the seriousness of the charge that counts, not the truth. Trump just needs to introduce a little bit of doubt into the minds of voters about Cruz. The average voter might doubt a story about 1 or 2 mistresses, but what if there are 5? Some of THAT story just might be true. Hey, and that's more mistresses than the media has reported from Trump's recent past. As Dan Rather would have you believe, even if the evidence is forged, the story must be true since it fits the narrative. Or more succinctly, its fake, but accurate. Even Rather's dissonance about forged documents and the truth is not at all applicable with this ridiculous piece of tripe.

6. Here was part of Donald Trump's response to the story. 

"I have no idea whether or not the cover story about Ted Cruz in this week’s issue of the National Enquirer is true or not..." 

Of course he knows its not true. Look at how he qualifies EXACTLY where and when you find this story, which according to him, may or may not be true. Stay classy Donald.

Trump continues to exhibit a sadistic personality disorder. Though I am not aware if it has been professionally diagnosed, I surely hope he seeks immediate treatment.

See how easy it is to Tweet passive aggressive statements like Trump? And just to be perfectly clear, the above statement is completely fictitious... as far as you know.

The Oompa Loompa continues...

“Ted Cruz’s problem with the National Enquirer is his and his alone, and while they were right about O.J. Simpson, John Edwards, and many others, I certainly hope they are not right about Lyin’ Ted Cruz.”

That certainly sounds a lot like the words of someone who played a part in the proliferation of this hit piece. And why not, the supermarket tabloid endorsed Donald Trump for President. It has continually rushed to his aid at just the perfect moment, taking out Carson and Fiorina when they threatened him in the polls. Notice again the qualifiers above attempting to inflate the integrity of the tabloid. NE might be the best of the supermarket rags, but its still at the absolute bottom of the media food chain, just slightly above Globe and Weekly World News. And that alone should be enough to discredit and dismiss this story.

Trump should call is good friend at the Enquirer and demand a stop to these muckraking shenanigans. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.

Oompa Loompa doompadee doo
I've got another puzzle for you
Oompa Loompa doompadah dee
If you are wise you'll listen to me

What do you get from a glut of TV?
A Trump in the race and an IQ of three


Sunday, March 27, 2016

What If Trump Ran As A Democrat?

Let's face it, Democrats are at a crossroads. They have lunged so far to the left that they now must choose between a radical left-wing nutcase, and Bernie Sanders. The former is just a brave prosecutor away from permanently wearing orange jumpsuits. The latter is at least honest enough to admit that he is socialist, and for that alone I respect the man.

Which brings us to Donald Trump. He is a reality TV celebrity, a businessman, and during this election cycle a Republican candidate for POTUS. That he would run as a Republican is a bit odd. As a lifelong New Yorker, which is not known for producing Republicans, let alone Conservative ones, he seems quite out of his element. Party loyalty is not something Trump is known for, having switched parties at least 5 times in his life. And to keep it real, he has given substantial sums to Democrats including thousands to Hillary Clinton, the likely DNC opponent in the general election. Apparently, donating to Clinton was not enough, as Trump really likes the politician.

Should we dismiss Trump's thousands donated to DNC candidates, and specifically to the DNC front-runner? Is it at all strange that he would have such glowing words for the opposition?

Take any issue that divides Conservatives and progressives, like abortion for instance. Most normal people recognize the difference between Good and evil, Light and darkness, at a much earlier age than their late 60s. Murdering children whether in the womb or outside the womb is evil. There is no wiggle room on this issue. We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights, among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Shoving scissors in the back of an infant's head CLEARLY, undermines those UNALIENABLE Rights. And yet Trump seems ambivalent on the issue. Praising his judge sister who supports partial birth abortion, and he seems quite supportive of Planned Parenthood, which murders infants in numbers that would make the Nazis blush.

If there is one clear dividing line between Conservatives and progressives, abortion is it. So if Trump feels so strongly about funding Planned Parenthood, and supports abortion even to the point of the diabolical partial birth version, then it makes little sense to run as a Republican.

So why didn't he run as a Democrat? If any party needs a course correction, it is definitely the DNC. And Trump is a natural fit. Living in New York he shares their values, believes in crony capitalism, and is used to big government corruption. He is the ideal progressive candidate. He enjoys the celebrity culture of the DNC, and is uncomfortable with ordinary folks who treasure principles, Godly values, and civility.

When it comes to votes, he attracts DNC voters like government handouts. The Texas primary provided ample evidence of this as the the GOP primary went from 1.4 million voters in 2012 to 2.8 million this year. While the numbers are exactly opposite for the Democrats going from 2.8 million in 2008, and dropping down to 1.4 million this year. Even with such a staggering Democrat influx, Trump had to settle for a humbling second place finish, falling nearly 500,000 votes behind Ted Cruz. In probably the most reliably Conservative state in the country, over 70% of the GOP voters selected someone other than Trump. Had he run in the DNC Texas primary, he likely wins in a landslide.

Trump's path to the White House would be far simpler destroying what is the weakest DNC field since Mondale ran against Reagan. After 8 years of Obama, even Democrats are doubting their leadership and party direction. So it literally makes no practical sense for Trump to abandon his natural base, and attempt to reimagine himself a Conservative.

So, why is he running as a Republican?