RSS Feed

Category Archives: Trump

Enough Already With the Media!!

Posted on

That’s about enough! 

Most of us wouldn’t treat anyone we knew like this! 

Have we forgotten what gossip is and what it does to people? Why have we now decided that some people are human but other people are not? Just because the media spreads gossip, lies and rumors does not mean that We The People should follow, give credence to, believe or even listen to the destructive things they say. 

What ever happened to believing that a person was innocent until “hard” or incontrovertible evidence proves otherwise? Nothing good ever came out of these historical periods of accusation and hysteria. Think back to the Salem witch trials, those were our not-so-distant ancestors who thought they were being practical and rational. After all…everyone agreed! Or what about the practice of slavery, not just in the United States but throughout history. We are one of, if not the only, country to eliminate it and then sincerely try to repair the damage! Full grown allegedly intelligent adults accepted it as common practice in the Middle Ages and in various countries it has continued until today. People can be conditioned and can become “hardened” to almost anything. If you don’t think people accept crowd defined norms then you need to go back and

Because I have standards of behavior, because I try to live by the Golden Rule, because I believe every person is a child of God I am not going to accuse my customers of stealing, I won’t say that my neighbor is cheating, I refuse to pass along rumors I know are probably untrue. I think most Americans are like this but have not really had the time to actually stop and think about what the media is doing to us. Ten or twenty years ago I would not have had time either.

Some vague accusation, a wild rumor, an anonymous tip, an unsubstantiated leak or even unverified gossip is front page news today and inevitably reported as fact (or as being under investigation by “authorities”). Since the Democratic Party has joined with the MSM in a joint mission to remove President Trump from office the press has become corrupt and agenda driven. They have not been objective or even decent in their coverage. There is no attention to detail, no verification of sources, no allegiance to truth. There is no value on American virtues, the Constitution, law and order or respect for family values and Christian faith. They try to manipulate their audience instead of informing them.

We should not allow this awful main stream media to affect or influence us in any way. America’s people have always been innovative, honest, generous, principled and we have always stood for what was right and good. None of this can be applied to the MSM in any way. 

Until the bulk of the press can pull itself out of the gutter, disassociate itself with any and all political parties and become honest journalists once more, I am no longer going to listen to or read any of them. There are plenty more reliable sources who are striving to uphold traditional journalistic standards.

Russia! Russia! Russia!

Posted on

Before a criticism is given, perhaps it should be thought all the way through.Practically every one of the components of the commonplace press has posted, broadcast or published at least one article/commentary denigrating President Trump for not “being firmer” or even “standing up to” Putin on the allegations of Russian interference in our last presidential election. I would like to add my humble opinion:

It is always presumptuous for any outsider to make a judgement about how one issue should be handled and fit into the overarching strategy of the relationship, the negotiations and what we want to get out of that regime or what path we want them on. They also presume that they know all about every phone call, every message, etc. However, often they do not know context at all. They are only presented with optics.

So, I think automatically about what my response would have been if I were Putin. It isn’t very difficult at all. The United States foolishly tried to meddle in the last major Israeli election, and to condemn us even further, Israel is one of our closest allies! I do not think President Trump would have come out on top of that argument. You could add in Libya, Iraq and more (justified or not they were sovereign nations).

Since Russia and America have not been on friendly terms for the last eight years and we have numerous other highly advanced technical adversaries in China, North Korea, Iran and etc. It seems a little ignorant to me that we neglect installing top notch protection and defense of our election systems. Why are we not angry at the people responsible for leaving us open to attack? Why are we not investigating the entire election, including the Democratic Party? Why are we not hardening the grid? Why are the democrats and the MSM trying so hard to focus the public and the politicians on Russian collusion with the Trump campaign? What are we missing while they are flashing their worthless shiny object?

Before we back any person in a corner and forcefully present him with his crime, we had better have good evidence. That is right and reasonable. It cannot be the expert opinion of 17 professional organizations, opinions will always be subjective. If there is no IRREFUTABLE proof, then President Trump sounds like the boy crying wolf. After all…..what proof does he have when so many other hackers can leave traces making themselves look like Russians? What real proof, hard evidence, do we actually possess?

Play it out in your mind, but take the part of Putin. Obama did not leave Trump an easy fact set to work with!

Trump’s Telling Tweets

Posted on


The President’s tweets have not been an issue for me one way or another. If I were advising him, I would naturally recommend that he be far more careful. However, that being said, the press just tries to use every tweet against him in some way. I think most people realize that and pay little attention to their obfuscation and outright falsification of the news.

What wrinkled up my forehead and started this post was the heavy response by women. Evidently, President Trump hit below the belt and committed a social faux pas when he mentioned that lady’s (?) facelift. This implies that there were/are rules in effect, I have heard endless clips of “THE MORNING JOE” , if there were any rules of civility and decorum being observed while covering President Trump it has not been at all apparent. Have we not heard the main stream media report every unconfirmed rumor, each unsubstantiated allegation? Do they not call the properly elected President of the United States every foul and disgusting name that is legal to utter on television? Furthermore, “THE MORNING JOE” is one of the worst shows to do this!

There may very well have been better ways to handle it, but if the President or the White House strikes back after so much constant abuse and rhetoric that is honestly beyond the pale and shameful for any American broadcasting station, no one should complain. She has said horrible, nasty and outright untrue things including that our President is mentally unstable, unqualified for the job, etc. The response to the tweet is that President Trump is being a misogynist and has no respect for women.

This is absolutely and unequivocally not true. In general, if one keeps an open mind and actually pays attention, he treats men and women exactly the same (in their chosen field). If they work with men as equals and hold themselves out as such then he treats them accordingly. https://www.yahoo.com/news/whats-up-with-donald-trump-and-the-women-not-090043983.html

To apply this to the tweet, our President would naturally assume that if you can dish out such gutter worthy below-the-belt trash then you ought to be able to take it like the pro you are holding yourself out to be. I have worked in construction, definitely a male dominated field, there is a choice you have to make as a woman. You can be a lady on a construction site or you can be a woman who demands (and gives) respect while interacting as an equal. It isn’t easy, but it can be done, however, you cannot flip back and forth between the two! The same is true for any profession. 

There is no honor in hitting a man where it hurts and then hiding behind behind being a woman when he turns around.

Double Standard?

Posted on

Looking at the current judicial approach to President Trump’s Executive Orders on Immigration, the courts are very outspoken about their ability to rely on his statements made during the campaign in order to determine the intent of the Orders. It may violate judicial precedent and certainly is contrary to the facts of the case, nevertheless, reason and logic has not been allowed to intrude on these Federal Court Decisions (9th and 4th Circuits) unconstitutionally removing a legal power from the executive branch.

Whether they take it now or wait until the conclusion of the Circuit Courts’ legal proceedings, eventually this issue will be facing the Supreme Court. During the campaign, at about the same period of time as President Trump’s campaign statements, one of our SCOTUS justices spoke out publicly against candidate Trump. Justice Ginsburg made some fairly extreme statements indicating that she did not like him at all. http://nypost.com/2016/07/11/ruth-bader-ginsburgs-unhinged-assault-on-trump/

Since judges are required to recuse themselves in circumstances like these, and although Supreme Court Justices are exempted, there is really no good reason why this should be so. If anything, recusal should be mandatory for justices also. The cases they decide are far too important and affect far too many lives to be decided with any justice who is too biased, opinionated or Politically motivated to objectively evaluate the facts, weigh the merits fairly or render a logical Constitutionally based decision. It is bad enough that Justice Ginsburg actually feels such animus, but it is beyond concerning when she cannot keep her mouth shut about it in front of the media.

So, (to quote my grandparents) what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Or maybe we should change judicial thought and say, what is said in the campaign stays in the campaign!

RePost From Judicial Watch on Robert Mueller:

Posted on

Now that Robert Mueller has been appointed special counsel to investigate if Russia influenced the 2016 presidential election it’s worth reiterating his misguided handiwork and collaboration with radical Islamist organizations as FBI director. Judicial Watch exclusively obtained droves of records back in 2013 documenting how, under Mueller’s leadership, the FBI purged all anti-terrorism training material deemed “offensive” to Muslims after secret meetings between Islamic organizations and the FBI chief. Judicial Watch had to sue to get the records and published an in-depth report on the scandal in 2013 and a lengthier, updated follow-up in 2015.

As FBI director, Mueller bent over backwards to please radical Islamist groups and caved into their demands. The agency eliminated the valuable anti-terrorism training material and curricula after Mueller met with various Islamist organizations, including those with documented ties to terrorism. Among them were two organizations— Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)—named by the U.S. government as unindicted co-conspirators in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation terrorist financing case. CAIR is a terrorist front group with extensive links to foreign and domestic Islamists. It was founded in 1994 by three Middle Eastern extremists (Omar Ahmad, Nihad Awad and Rafeeq Jaber) who ran the American propaganda wing of Hamas, known then as the Islamic Association for Palestine.

The records obtained as part of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit show that Mueller, who served 12 years as FBI chief, met with the Islamist organizations on February 8, 2012 to hear their demands. Shortly later the director assured the Muslim groups that he had ordered the removal of presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices nationwide. The purge was part of a broader Islamist operation designed to influence the opinions and actions of persons, institutions, governments and the public at-large. The records obtained by Judicial Watch also show similar incidents of Islamic influence operations at the Departments of Justice and State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Obama White House.

Here are some of the reasons provided by Mueller’s FBI for getting rid of “offensive” training documents: “Article is highly inflammatory and inaccurately argues the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization.” It’s crucial to note that Mueller himself had previously described the Muslim Brotherhood as a group that supports terrorism in the U.S. and overseas when his agency provided this ludicrous explanation. Here’s more training material that offended the terrorist groups, according to the FBI files provided to Judicial Watch: An article claiming Al Qaeda is “clearly linked” to the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing; The Qur’an is not the teachings of the Prophet, but the revealed word of God; Sweeping generality of ‘Those who fit the terrorist profile best (for the present at least) are young male immigrants of Middle Eastern appearance;’ conflating Islamic Militancy with terrorism. The list goes on and on.

Mueller’s actions have had a widespread effect because many local law enforcement agencies followed the FBI’s lead in allowing Islamic groups like CAIR to dictate what anti-terrorism material could be used to train officers. Among them are police departments in three Illinois cities— Lombard, Elmhurst and Highland Park—as well as the New York Police Department (NYPD). In the case of the Lombard Police Department, CAIR asserted that the instructor of a training course called “Islamic Awareness as a Counter-Terrorist Strategy” was anti-Muslim though there was no evidence to support it. Like the FBI, Lombard officials got rid of the “offensive” course. The NYPD purged a highly-acclaimed report that’s proven to be a critical tool in terrorism investigations after three New York Muslims, two mosques and an Islamic nonprofit filed a lawsuit.
Considering Mueller’s role in much of this, it makes him a bizarre choice to lead the heated Russia investigation. The goal, apparently, is to determine of Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election and if President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian officials. In the Justice Department announcement, Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein describes Mueller as person who qualifies to lead the probe because he exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command. “Special Counsel Mueller will have all appropriate resources to conduct a thorough and complete investigation, and I am confident that he will follow the facts, apply the law and reach a just result,” according to Rosenstein.

Give Me Liberty…..

Posted on

For as William Lloyd Garrison opined:
“I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to speak, or write, with moderation. No! no! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; — but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I WILL BE HEARD.”

It seems to be of no significance which party wins any election. Regardless of outcome, all of the political debate, the government’s decisions and movements, the ways and means of making decisions, everything that actually makes the government tick is manipulated skillfully by the democrats. The republicans do not fight this manipulation, in fact, the louder the message is which originates with the Democratic Party and their “talking heads” the more likely the Republicans are to give in to the pressure. After seeing this machine in action since election night, it has totally changed my mind about that party and its motives. 

Although the Democratic Party presents itself as a great representative of the people constantly keeping the government honest and diligently pursuing justice, in truth democrats have shown themselves to be totally corrupt, mindlessly in pursuit of power and deliberately blind to the negative consequences. Furthermore, the democrats have demonstrated repeatedly that they do not care about this country, its Founding Documents, our history or our culture and traditions. 

Time after time the Democratic Party has openly displayed its character for all to see, putting forth Hillary Clinton for president even when there was enough evidence made public to convict her of numerous federal violations, no republican could have, or ever would have, used the IRS to target democratic organizations in an effort to damage the opposing party, what president has ever just ordered that our borders not be enforced and that illegals be allowed in? There were so many things that Obama did that upset and distressed conservatives, republicans, libertarians, independents and free thinkers. In addition to what I have mentioned already there is “fast and furious”, Clinton’s State Department access for pay scandal, Clinton’s uranium deal with Russia, the lies told about the Iran treaty and hiding all of the secret side deals from the Congress and the people and etc.

Yet, except for Benghazi, not one investigative committee convened. No hordes of republicans took to the streets burning cars and smashing out building Windows. No republicans formed groups to attack democrats. Obama’s cabinet nominees were approved relatively quickly as were his decidedly liberal Supreme Court Judges. On most legislation, but not all, Republicans either worked with, negotiated with or just gave in to Democrats. Obama’s threatened veto on any potential bill was mighty indeed!

President Trump seems to be treated differently by the media and certainly by the Democratic Party. A Harvard Professor just finished a study and reported that the way in which the media has gone after Trump, trying to destroy him, is literally unprecedented! Never before has the media machine operated in concert together with such a singular purpose of the personal destruction of a legitimately elected president. He is denigrated, obstructed, laughed at, misrepresented and misquoted. His words are deliberately lifted out of context and twisted out of all relationship to what he originally meant. He is presumed a liar and a cheat while he is working nonstop to make America a better place for her citizens. To add insult to injury, his own party is not being all that helpful in Congress.

President Trump is making an excellent start on his term. He has signed new trade deals bringing jobs to our shores and has also issued executive orders which get rid of onerous and excessive government regulations and this too means more jobs. He has worked hard to promote American Industry, reform the tax code which will hopefully pass soon, to straighten out the health system and to turn back the tidal wave of illegal immigrants flooding across our southern border. 

President Trump has certainly shown a talent if not pure genius in foreign affairs. Trump may be unappreciated at home, but our allies absolutely do appreciate him and seem to understand him much better than we do. Isn’t it interesting that the president who our media fawned over constantly managed to damage our relationships with almost every ally. The Saudi Arabians said that they had been waiting for Trump for eight years. The judges (read Democratic Party and liberal) in the two circuits that claim Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration was issued because he was biased against Muslims should feel like total idiots now!

Always, though, facts will be ignored, buried, covered up or otherwise twisted or changed. The Democratic Party is perfectly willing to lie, threaten, destroy and commit fraud to win elections. How then can we not acknowledge that they have become more of a criminal enterprise than a political party? We cannot allow this continuing manipulation of the dialogue through the media, the persistent changing of the values and the belief systems of our young people through the liberal teachings of academia and the ever increasing rise of liberal intolerance for any other point of view. No one will stop this, no one will save us, no one is responsible for maintaining our freedom but us! In the end, each generation must fight to preserve the Liberty that we all consider our birthright. As the disaster in Venezuela has so brutally demonstrated, tyranny with all of its misery and suffering is never more than a generation away. (I wish I could remember who said that!)

We should not be watching Trump fight for us on TV. We should do whatever we can do to help!

Repost from RussP.us (Russ Paielli)

Posted on

A Short History of Democrats, Republicans, and Racism

The following are a few basic historical facts that every American should know.

Fact: The Republican Party was founded primarily to oppose slavery, and Republicans eventually abolished slavery. The Democratic Party fought them and tried to maintain and expand slavery. The 13th Amendment, abolishing slavery, passed in 1865 with 100% Republican support but only 23% Democrat support in congress.

Why is this indisputable fact so rarely mentioned? PBS documentaries about slavery and the Civil War barely mention it, for example. One can certainly argue that the parties have changed in 150 years (more about that below), but that does not change the historical fact that it was the Democrats who supported slavery and the Republicans who opposed it. And that indisputable fact should not be airbrushed out for fear that it will tarnish the modern Democratic Party.

Had the positions of the parties been the opposite, and the Democrats had fought the Republicans to end slavery, the historical party roles would no doubt be repeated incessantly in these documentaries. Funny how that works.

Fact: During the Civil War era, the “Radical Republicans” were given that name because they wanted to not only end slavery but also to endow the freed slaves with full citizenship, equality, and rights.

Yes, that was indeed a radical idea at the time!

Fact: Lincoln’s Vice President, Andrew Johnson, was a strongly pro-Union (but also pro-slavery) Democrat who had been chosen by Lincoln as a compromise running mate to attract Democrats. After Lincoln was assassinated, Johnson thwarted Republican efforts in Congress to recognize the civil rights of the freed slaves, and Southern Democrats continued to thwart any such efforts for close to a century.

Fact: The 14th Amendment, giving full citizenship to freed slaves, passed in 1868 with 94% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress. The 15th Amendment, giving freed slaves the right to vote, passed in 1870 with 100% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress.

Regardless of what has happened since then, shouldn’t we be grateful to the Republicans for these Amendments to the Constitution? And shouldn’t we remember which party stood for freedom and which party fiercely opposed it?

Fact: The Ku Klux Klan was originally and primarily an arm of the Southern Democratic Party. Its mission was to terrorize freed slaves and “ni**er-loving” (their words) Republicans who sympathized with them.

Why is this fact conveniently omitted in so many popular histories and depictions of the KKK, including PBS documentaries? Had the KKK been founded by Republicans, that fact would no doubt be repeated constantly on those shows.

Fact: In the 1950s, President Eisenhower, a Republican, integrated the US military and promoted civil rights for minorities. Eisenhower pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1957. One of Eisenhower’s primary political opponents on civil rights prior to 1957 was none other than Lyndon Johnson, then the Democratic Senate Majority Leader. LBJ had voted the straight segregationist line until he changed his position and supported the 1957 Act.

Fact: The historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress. In the House, 80 percent of the Republicans and 63 percent of the Democrats voted in favor. In the Senate, 82 percent of the Republicans and 69 percent of the Democrats voted for it.

Fact: Contrary to popular misconception, the parties never “switched” on racism. The Democrats just switched from overt racism to a subversive strategy of getting blacks as dependent as possible on government to secure their votes. At the same time, they began a cynical smear campaign to label anyone who opposes their devious strategy as greedy racists.

Following the epic civil rights struggles of the 1960s, the South began a major demographic shift from Democratic to Republican dominance. Many believe that this shift was motivated by racism. While it is certainly true that many Southern racists abandoned the Democratic Party over its new support for racial equality and integration, the notion that they would flock to the Republican Party — which was a century ahead of the Democrats on those issues — makes no sense whatsoever.

Yet virtually every liberal, when pressed on the matter, will inevitably claim that the parties “switched,” and most racist Democrats became Republicans! In their minds, this historical ju jitsu maneuver apparently transfers all the past sins of the Democrats (slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow laws, etc.) onto the Republicans and all the past virtues of the Republicans (e.g., ending slavery) onto the Democrats! That’s quite a feat!

It is true that Barry Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 probably attracted some racist Democrats to the Republican Party. However, Goldwater was not a racist — at least not an overt racist like so many Southern Democrats of the time, such as George Wallace and Bull Connor. He publicly professed racial equality, and his opposition to the 1964 Act was based on principled grounds of states rights. In any case, his libertarian views were out of step with the mainstream, and he lost the 1964 Presidential election to LBJ in a landslide.

But Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act provided liberals an opening to tar the Republican Party as racist, and they have tenaciously repeated that label so often over the years that it is now the conventional wisdom among liberals. But it is really nothing more than an unsubstantiated myth — a convenient political lie. If the Republican Party was any more racist than the Democratic Party even in 1964, why did a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress vote for the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The idea that Goldwater’s vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Act trumps a century of history of the Republican Party is ridiculous, to say the least.

Every political party has its racists, but the notion that Republicans are more racist than Democrats or any other party is based on nothing more than a constant drumbeat of unsubstantiated innuendo and assertions by Leftists, constantly echoed by the liberal media. It is a classic example of a Big Lie that becomes “true” simply by virtue of being repeated so many times.

A more likely explanation for the long-term shift from Democratic to Republican dominance in the South was the perception, fair or not, that the Democratic Party had rejected traditional Christian religious values and embraced radical secularism. That includes its hardline support for abortion, its rejection of prayer in public schools, its promotion of the gay agenda, and many other issues.

In the 1960s the Democratic Party changed its strategy for dealing with African Americans. Thanks to earlier Republican initiatives on civil rights, blatant racial oppression was no longer a viable political option. Whereas before that time Southern Democrats had overtly and proudly segregated and terrorized blacks, the national Democratic Party decided instead to be more subtle and get them as dependent on government as possible. As LBJ so elegantly put it (in a famous moment of candor that was recorded for posterity), “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” At the same time, the Democrats started a persistent campaign of lies and innuendo, falsely equating any opposition to their welfare state with racism.

From a purely cynical political perspective, the Democratic strategy of black dependence has been extremely effective. LBJ knew exactly what he was doing. African Americans routinely vote well over 90 percent Democratic for fear that Republicans will cut their government benefits and welfare programs. And what is the result? Before LBJ’s Great Society welfare programs, the black illegitimacy rate was as low as 23 percent, but now it has more than tripled to 72 percent.

Most major American city governments have been run by liberal Democrats for decades, and most of those cities have large black sections that are essentially dysfunctional anarchies. Cities like Detroit are overrun by gangs and drug dealers, with burned out homes on every block in some areas. The land values are so low due to crime, blight, and lack of economic opportunity that condemned homes are not even worth rebuilding. Who wants to build a home in an urban war zone? Yet they keep electing liberal Democrats — and blaming “racist” Republicans for their problems!

Washington DC is another city that has been dominated by liberal Democrats for decades. It spends more per capita on students than almost any other city in the world, yet it has some of the worst academic achievement anywhere and is a drug-infested hellhole. Barack Obama would not dream of sending his own precious daughters to the DC public schools, of course — but he assures us that those schools are good enough for everyone else. In fact, Obama was instrumental in killing a popular and effective school voucher program in DC, effectively killing hopes for many poor black families trapped in those dysfunctional public schools. His allegiance to the teachers unions apparently trumps his concern for poor black families.

A strong argument could also be made that Democratic support for perpetual affirmative action is racist. It is, after all, the antithesis of Martin Luther King’s dream of a color-blind society. Not only is it “reverse racism,” but it is based on the premise that African Americans are incapable of competing in the free market on a level playing field. In other words, it is based on the notion of white supremacy, albeit “benevolent” white supremacy rather than the openly hostile white supremacy of the pre-1960s Democratic Party.

The next time someone claims that Republicans are racist and Democrats are not, don’t fall for it.

I ran across this website and liked this post so much I just had to repost it. I don’t know know if I have ever read a better short summary on this issue!

RussP.us

A Backpack , A Chair and A Beard

Think of all the beauty still left around you, and be happy

Classic, Not Contemporary

Reviving classical life in a modern world

larrysmusings

This WordPress.com site is for insights, observations and comments on random issues. We are part social critic, part philosopher, part dreamer, and part seeker after elusive truths.

A swede's take on America

politics, islam, usa, sweden, muslims, middle east, world politics

The Rouser

Wake up. Ask Why?

Reclaim Our Republic

Knowledge Is Power

SMALLGOVREPORT

Always question the premise

%d bloggers like this: