NO, they won't! What will the liberals come up with next?
Free North Carolina: Will the liberal death threats end today?
Monday, December 19, 2016
Saturday, November 26, 2016
Free North Carolina: The Obama Era is Over
Free North Carolina: The Obama Era is Over
"Obama didn't make history after all. He wasn't a teleprompter demi-god standing athwart of history. He was Carter and Ford. He was there to be forgotten. He didn't change the world. He wasn't the messiah. He was merely mortal. Just another politician who will sag and age. Who will, in the end, be photographed like Bill Clinton, lonely and lost in a world that has passed him by.
The Obama era ends not with a bang, but with a whimper. With a national consensus that maybe he didn't really matter so much after all. And those to whom he mattered the most were his enemies determined to undo everything he did.
Obama once thought that he belonged to the ages. Now he belongs in the rubbish bin."
"Obama didn't make history after all. He wasn't a teleprompter demi-god standing athwart of history. He was Carter and Ford. He was there to be forgotten. He didn't change the world. He wasn't the messiah. He was merely mortal. Just another politician who will sag and age. Who will, in the end, be photographed like Bill Clinton, lonely and lost in a world that has passed him by.
The Obama era ends not with a bang, but with a whimper. With a national consensus that maybe he didn't really matter so much after all. And those to whom he mattered the most were his enemies determined to undo everything he did.
Obama once thought that he belonged to the ages. Now he belongs in the rubbish bin."
Monday, October 17, 2016
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Monday, September 26, 2016
Ralphie the Conservative Dog: Ralphie The Conservative Dog Thinks Someone Is Get...
Ralphie the Conservative Dog: Ralphie The Conservative Dog Thinks Someone Is Get...: Someone Is Getting A Spanking This November!
Sunday, September 25, 2016
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Unhinged Liberal Stops at Trump Supporter’s Home, Flips Him Off, Calls Him Racist, Hurls F-Bombs (VIDEO)
Free North Carolina: Unhinged Liberal Stops at Trump Supporter’s Home, Flips Him Off, Calls Him Racist, Hurls F-Bombs (VIDEO)
It is ok he is a liberal and won't be held accountable for his actions
It is ok he is a liberal and won't be held accountable for his actions
Thursday, September 22, 2016
Sunday, September 18, 2016
Monday, September 12, 2016
Unique Beauty Of Freckled People
WOW Beautiful!
I have some freckles but my father was loaded! They wrote about him in the Greensboro News & Record (North Carolina) in the mid-60's because he was a member of the gang named "The Spoons" and his gang name was FRECKLES :) They were vicious as you can tell by the names lol
Free North Carolina: Unique Beauty Of Freckled People: Lond-based photographer Brock Elbank is on a journey to photograph 150 freckled people for his next exhibition in 2017. He wants to celebrate beauty and, since mid-2015, he has succeeded with 90 striking portraits.
"I’ve always loved freckles," said Elbank. "What I find interesting about individual characters that I have been fortunate enough to photograph is that many have struggled with their freckles since their infancy and either hated them, or grown to live with them or even like them in adulthood."
"One subject I shot in September for the series spent a good three to four hours with me after the portrait, talking about how they felt as a kid, bullied, rejected at school for their appearance, which really shocked me as I found this individual amazing-looking." If you want to be featured, you can still contact him!
I have some freckles but my father was loaded! They wrote about him in the Greensboro News & Record (North Carolina) in the mid-60's because he was a member of the gang named "The Spoons" and his gang name was FRECKLES :) They were vicious as you can tell by the names lol
Free North Carolina: Unique Beauty Of Freckled People: Lond-based photographer Brock Elbank is on a journey to photograph 150 freckled people for his next exhibition in 2017. He wants to celebrate beauty and, since mid-2015, he has succeeded with 90 striking portraits.
"I’ve always loved freckles," said Elbank. "What I find interesting about individual characters that I have been fortunate enough to photograph is that many have struggled with their freckles since their infancy and either hated them, or grown to live with them or even like them in adulthood."
"One subject I shot in September for the series spent a good three to four hours with me after the portrait, talking about how they felt as a kid, bullied, rejected at school for their appearance, which really shocked me as I found this individual amazing-looking." If you want to be featured, you can still contact him!
Tuesday, September 6, 2016
The Flight 93 Election
The Flight 93 Election
I typically do not copy and paste an entire article - hoping anyone inclined to view the article will travel to the original. But in this case I was struck by the brutal honesty - the notion that WE THE PEOPLE are rushing the "cockpit" (the White House).
Makes me wonder, can we do this without a battle? I know far-fetched but my hope is we will win this war against stupidity - and I am willing to do so at any cost! Are you?
PS - If you do not know what Flight 93 is DO NOT TELL ME just google it and be enlightened!
-------
2016 is the Flight 93 election: charge the cockpit or you die. You may die anyway. You—or the leader of your party—may make it into the cockpit and not know how to fly or land the plane. There are no guarantees.
Except one: if you don’t try, death is certain. To compound the metaphor: a Hillary Clinton presidency is Russian Roulette with a semi-auto. With Trump, at least you can spin the cylinder and take your chances.
To ordinary conservative ears, this sounds histrionic. The stakes can’t be that high because they are never that high—except perhaps in the pages of Gibbon. Conservative intellectuals will insist that there has been no “end of history” and that all human outcomes are still possible. They will even—as Charles Kesler does—admit that America is in “crisis.” But how great is the crisis? Can things really be so bad if eight years of Obama can be followed by eight more of Hillary, and yet Constitutionalist conservatives can still reasonably hope for a restoration of our cherished ideals? Cruz in 2024!
Not to pick (too much) on Kesler, who is less unwarrantedly optimistic than most conservatives. And who, at least, poses the right question: Trump or Hillary? Though his answer—“even if [Trump] had chosen his policies at random, they would be sounder than Hillary’s”—is unwarrantedly ungenerous. The truth is that Trump articulated, if incompletely and inconsistently, the right stances on the right issues—immigration, trade, and war—right from the beginning.
But let us back up. One of the paradoxes—there are so many—of conservative thought over the last decade at least is the unwillingness even to entertain the possibility that America and the West are on a trajectory toward something very bad. On the one hand, conservatives routinely present a litany of ills plaguing the body politic. Illegitimacy. Crime. Massive, expensive, intrusive, out-of-control government. Politically correct McCarthyism. Ever-higher taxes and ever-deteriorating services and infrastructure. Inability to win wars against tribal, sub-Third-World foes. A disastrously awful educational system that churns out kids who don’t know anything and, at the primary and secondary levels, can’t (or won’t) discipline disruptive punks, and at the higher levels saddles students with six figure debts for the privilege. And so on and drearily on. Like that portion of the mass where the priest asks for your private intentions, fill in any dismal fact about American decline that you want and I’ll stipulate it.
Conservatives spend at least several hundred million dollars a year on think-tanks, magazines, conferences, fellowships, and such, complaining about this, that, the other, and everything. And yet these same conservatives are, at root, keepers of the status quo. Oh, sure, they want some things to change. They want their pet ideas adopted—tax deductions for having more babies and the like. Many of them are even good ideas. But are any of them truly fundamental? Do they get to the heart of our problems?
If conservatives are right about the importance of virtue, morality, religious faith, stability, character and so on in the individual; if they are right about sexual morality or what came to be termed “family values”; if they are right about the importance of education to inculcate good character and to teach the fundamentals that have defined knowledge in the West for millennia; if they are right about societal norms and public order; if they are right about the centrality of initiative, enterprise, industry, and thrift to a sound economy and a healthy society; if they are right about the soul-sapping effects of paternalistic Big Government and its cannibalization of civil society and religious institutions; if they are right about the necessity of a strong defense and prudent statesmanship in the international sphere—if they are right about the importance of all this to national health and even survival, then they must believe—mustn’t they?—that we are headed off a cliff.
But it’s quite obvious that conservatives don’t believe any such thing, that they feel no such sense of urgency, of an immediate necessity to change course and avoid the cliff. A recent article by Matthew Continetti may be taken as representative—indeed, almost written for the purpose of illustrating the point. Continetti inquires into the “condition of America” and finds it wanting. What does Continetti propose to do about it? The usual litany of “conservative” “solutions,” with the obligatory references to decentralization, federalization, “civic renewal,” and—of course!—Burke. Which is to say, conservatism’s typical combination of the useless and inapt with the utopian and unrealizable. Decentralization and federalism are all well and good, and as a conservative, I endorse them both without reservation. But how are they going to save, or even meaningfully improve, the America that Continetti describes? What can they do against a tidal wave of dysfunction, immorality, and corruption? “Civic renewal” would do a lot of course, but that’s like saying health will save a cancer patient. A step has been skipped in there somewhere. How are we going to achieve “civic renewal”? Wishing for a tautology to enact itself is not a strategy.
Continetti trips over a more promising approach when he writes of “stress[ing] the ‘national interest abroad and national solidarity at home’ through foreign-policy retrenchment, ‘support to workers buffeted by globalization,’ and setting ‘tax rates and immigration levels’ to foster social cohesion." That sounds a lot like Trumpism. But the phrases that Continetti quotes are taken from Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam, both of whom, like Continetti, are vociferously—one might even say fanatically—anti-Trump. At least they, unlike Kesler, give Trump credit for having identified the right stance on today’s most salient issues. Yet, paradoxically, they won’t vote for Trump whereas Kesler hints that he will. It’s reasonable, then, to read into Kesler’s esoteric endorsement of Trump an implicit acknowledgment that the crisis is, indeed, pretty dire. I expect a Claremont scholar to be wiser than most other conservative intellectuals, and I am relieved not to be disappointed in this instance.
Yet we may also reasonably ask: What explains the Pollyanna-ish declinism of so many others? That is, the stance that Things-Are-Really-Bad—But-Not-So-Bad-that-We-Have-to-Consider-Anything-Really-Different! The obvious answer is that they don’t really believe the first half of that formulation. If so, like Chicken Little, they should stick a sock in it. Pecuniary reasons also suggest themselves, but let us foreswear recourse to this explanation until we have disproved all the others.
Whatever the reason for the contradiction, there can be no doubt that there is a contradiction. To simultaneously hold conservative cultural, economic, and political beliefs—to insist that our liberal-left present reality and future direction is incompatible with human nature and must undermine society—and yet also believe that things can go on more or less the way they are going, ideally but not necessarily with some conservative tinkering here and there, is logically impossible.
Let’s be very blunt here: if you genuinely think things can go on with no fundamental change needed, then you have implicitly admitted that conservatism is wrong. Wrong philosophically, wrong on human nature, wrong on the nature of politics, and wrong in its policy prescriptions. Because, first, few of those prescriptions are in force today. Second, of the ones that are, the left is busy undoing them, often with conservative assistance. And, third, the whole trend of the West is ever-leftward, ever further away from what we all understand as conservatism.
If your answer—Continetti’s, Douthat’s, Salam’s, and so many others’—is for conservatism to keep doing what it’s been doing—another policy journal, another article about welfare reform, another half-day seminar on limited government, another tax credit proposal—even though we’ve been losing ground for at least a century, then you’ve implicitly accepted that your supposed political philosophy doesn’t matter and that civilization will carry on just fine under leftist tenets. Indeed, that leftism is truer than conservatism and superior to it.
They will say, in words reminiscent of dorm-room Marxism—but our proposals have not been tried! Here our ideas sit, waiting to be implemented! To which I reply: eh, not really. Many conservative solutions—above all welfare reform and crime control—have been tried, and proved effective, but have nonetheless failed to stem the tide. Crime, for instance, is down from its mid-’70s and early ’90s peak—but way, way up from the historic American norm that ended when liberals took over criminal justice in the mid-’60s. And it’s rising fast today, in the teeth of ineffectual conservative complaints. And what has this temporary crime (or welfare, for that matter) decline done to stem the greater tide? The tsunami of leftism that still engulfs our every—literal and figurative—shore has receded not a bit but indeed has grown. All your (our) victories are short-lived.
More to the point, what has conservatism achieved lately? In the last 20 years? The answer—which appears to be “nothing”—might seem to lend credence to the plea that “our ideas haven’t been tried.” Except that the same conservatives who generate those ideas are in charge of selling them to the broader public. If their ideas “haven’t been tried,” who is ultimately at fault? The whole enterprise of Conservatism, Inc., reeks of failure. Its sole recent and ongoing success is its own self-preservation. Conservative intellectuals never tire of praising “entrepreneurs” and “creative destruction.” Dare to fail! they exhort businessmen. Let the market decide! Except, um, not with respect to us. Or is their true market not the political arena, but the fundraising circuit?
Only three questions matter. First, how bad are things really? Second, what do we do right now? Third, what should we do for the long term?
Conservatism, Inc.’s, “answer” to the first may, at this point, simply be dismissed. If the conservatives wish to have a serious debate, I for one am game—more than game; eager. The problem of “subjective certainty” can only be overcome by going into the agora. But my attempt to do so—the blog that Kesler mentions—was met largely with incredulity. How can they say that?! How can anyone apparently of our caste (conservative intellectuals) not merely support Trump (however lukewarmly) but offer reasons for doing do?
One of the Journal of American Greatness’s deeper arguments was that only in a corrupt republic, in corrupt times, could a Trump rise. It is therefore puzzling that those most horrified by Trump are the least willing to consider the possibility that the republic is dying. That possibility, apparently, seems to them so preposterous that no refutation is necessary.
As does, presumably, the argument that the stakes in 2016 are—everything. I should here note that I am a good deal gloomier than my (former) JAG colleagues, and that while we frequently used the royal “we” when discussing things on which we all agreed, I here speak only for myself.
How have the last two decades worked out for you, personally? If you’re a member or fellow-traveler of the Davos class, chances are: pretty well. If you’re among the subspecies conservative intellectual or politician, you’ve accepted—perhaps not consciously, but unmistakably—your status on the roster of the Washington Generals of American politics. Your job is to show up and lose, but you are a necessary part of the show and you do get paid. To the extent that you are ever on the winning side of anything, it’s as sophists who help the Davoisie oligarchy rationalize open borders, lower wages, outsourcing, de-industrialization, trade giveaways, and endless, pointless, winless war.
All of Trump’s 16 Republican competitors would have ensured more of the same—as will the election of Hillary Clinton. That would be bad enough. But at least Republicans are merely reactive when it comes to wholesale cultural and political change. Their “opposition” may be in all cases ineffectual and often indistinguishable from support. But they don’t dream up inanities like 32 “genders,” elective bathrooms, single-payer, Iran sycophancy, “Islamophobia,” and Black Lives Matter. They merely help ratify them.
A Hillary presidency will be pedal-to-the-metal on the entire Progressive-left agenda, plus items few of us have yet imagined in our darkest moments. Nor is even that the worst. It will be coupled with a level of vindictive persecution against resistance and dissent hitherto seen in the supposedly liberal West only in the most “advanced” Scandinavian countries and the most leftist corners of Germany and England. We see this already in the censorship practiced by the Davoisie’s social media enablers; in the shameless propaganda tidal wave of the mainstream media; and in the personal destruction campaigns—operated through the former and aided by the latter—of the Social Justice Warriors. We see it in Obama’s flagrant use of the IRS to torment political opponents, the gaslighting denial by the media, and the collective shrug by everyone else.
It’s absurd to assume that any of this would stop or slow—would do anything other than massively intensify—in a Hillary administration. It’s even more ridiculous to expect that hitherto useless conservative opposition would suddenly become effective. For two generations at least, the Left has been calling everyone to their right Nazis. This trend has accelerated exponentially in the last few years, helped along by some on the Right who really do seem to merit—and even relish—the label. There is nothing the modern conservative fears more than being called “racist,” so alt-right pocket Nazis are manna from heaven for the Left. But also wholly unnecessary: sauce for the goose. The Left was calling us Nazis long before any pro-Trumpers tweeted Holocaust denial memes. And how does one deal with a Nazi—that is, with an enemy one is convinced intends your destruction? You don’t compromise with him or leave him alone. You crush him.
So what do we have to lose by fighting back? Only our Washington Generals jerseys—and paychecks. But those are going away anyway. Among the many things the “Right” still doesn’t understand is that the Left has concluded that this particular show need no longer go on. They don’t think they need a foil anymore and would rather dispense with the whole bother of staging these phony contests in which each side ostensibly has a shot.
If you haven’t noticed, our side has been losing consistently since 1988. We can win midterms, but we do nothing with them. Call ours Hannibalic victories. After the Carthaginian’s famous slaughter of a Roman army at Cannae, he failed to march on an undefended Rome, prompting his cavalry commander to complain: “you know how to win a victory, but not how to use one.” And, aside from 2004’s lackluster 50.7%, we can’t win the big ones at all.
Because the deck is stacked overwhelmingly against us. I will mention but three ways. First, the opinion-making elements—the universities and the media above all—are wholly corrupt and wholly opposed to everything we want, and increasingly even to our existence. (What else are the wars on “cis-genderism”—formerly known as “nature”—and on the supposed “white privilege” of broke hillbillies really about?) If it hadn’t been abundantly clear for the last 50 years, the campaign of 2015-2016 must surely have made it evident to even the meanest capacities that the intelligentsia—including all the organs through which it broadcasts its propaganda—is overwhelmingly partisan and biased. Against this onslaught, “conservative” media is a nullity, barely a whisper. It cannot be heard above the blaring of what has been aptly called “The Megaphone.”
Second, our Washington Generals self-handicap and self-censor to an absurd degree. Lenin is supposed to have said that “the best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” But with an opposition like ours, why bother? Our “leaders” and “dissenters” bend over backward to play by the self-sabotaging rules the Left sets for them. Fearful, beaten dogs have more thymos.
Third and most important, the ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners with no tradition of, taste for, or experience in liberty means that the electorate grows more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle. As does, of course, the U.S. population, which only serves to reinforce the two other causes outlined above. This is the core reason why the Left, the Democrats, and the bipartisan junta (categories distinct but very much overlapping) think they are on the cusp of a permanent victory that will forever obviate the need to pretend to respect democratic and constitutional niceties. Because they are.
It’s also why they treat open borders as the “absolute value,” the one “principle” that—when their “principles” collide—they prioritize above all the others. If that fact is insufficiently clear, consider this. Trump is the most liberal Republican nominee since Thomas Dewey. He departs from conservative orthodoxy in so many ways that National Review still hasn’t stopped counting. But let’s stick to just the core issues animating his campaign. On trade, globalization, and war, Trump is to the left (conventionally understood) not only of his own party, but of his Democratic opponent. And yet the Left and the junta are at one with the house-broken conservatives in their determination—desperation—not merely to defeat Trump but to destroy him. What gives?
Oh, right—there’s that other issue. The sacredness of mass immigration is the mystic chord that unites America’s ruling and intellectual classes. Their reasons vary somewhat. The Left and the Democrats seek ringers to form a permanent electoral majority. They, or many of them, also believe the academic-intellectual lie that America’s inherently racist and evil nature can be expiated only through ever greater “diversity.” The junta of course craves cheaper and more docile labor. It also seeks to legitimize, and deflect unwanted attention from, its wealth and power by pretending that its open borders stance is a form of noblesse oblige. The Republicans and the “conservatives”? Both of course desperately want absolution from the charge of “racism.” For the latter, this at least makes some sense. No Washington General can take the court—much less cash his check—with that epithet dancing over his head like some Satanic Spirit. But for the former, this priestly grace comes at the direct expense of their worldly interests. Do they honestly believe that the right enterprise zone or charter school policy will arouse 50.01% of our newer voters to finally reveal their “natural conservatism” at the ballot box? It hasn’t happened anywhere yet and shows no signs that it ever will. But that doesn’t stop the Republican refrain: more, more, more! No matter how many elections they lose, how many districts tip forever blue, how rarely (if ever) their immigrant vote cracks 40%, the answer is always the same. Just like Angela Merkel after yet another rape, shooting, bombing, or machete attack. More, more, more!
This is insane. This is the mark of a party, a society, a country, a people, a civilization that wants to die. Trump, alone among candidates for high office in this or in the last seven (at least) cycles, has stood up to say: I want to live. I want my party to live. I want my country to live. I want my people to live. I want to end the insanity.
Yes, Trump is worse than imperfect. So what? We can lament until we choke the lack of a great statesman to address the fundamental issues of our time—or, more importantly, to connect them. Since Pat Buchanan’s three failures, occasionally a candidate arose who saw one piece: Dick Gephardt on trade, Ron Paul on war, Tom Tancredo on immigration. Yet, among recent political figures—great statesmen, dangerous demagogues, and mewling gnats alike—only Trump-the-alleged-buffoon not merely saw all three and their essential connectivity, but was able to win on them. The alleged buffoon is thus more prudent—more practically wise—than all of our wise-and-good who so bitterly oppose him. This should embarrass them. That their failures instead embolden them is only further proof of their foolishness and hubris.
Which they self-laud as “consistency”—adherence to “conservative principle,” defined by the 1980 campaign and the household gods of reigning conservative think-tanks. A higher consistency in the service of the national interest apparently eludes them. When America possessed a vast, empty continent and explosively growing industry, high immigration was arguably good policy. (Arguably: Ben Franklin would disagree.) It hasn’t made sense since World War I. Free trade was unquestionably a great boon to the American worker in the decades after World War II. We long ago passed the point of diminishing returns. The Gulf War of 1991 was a strategic victory for American interests. No conflict since then has been. Conservatives either can’t see this—or, worse, those who can nonetheless treat the only political leader to mount a serious challenge to the status quo (more immigration, more trade, more war) as a unique evil.
Trump’s vulgarity is in fact a godsend to the conservatives. It allows them to hang their public opposition on his obvious shortcomings and to ignore or downplay his far greater strengths, which should be even more obvious but in corrupt times can be deliberately obscured by constant references to his faults. That the Left would make the campaign all about the latter is to be expected. Why would the Right? Some—a few—are no doubt sincere in their belief that the man is simply unfit for high office. David Frum, who has always been an immigration skeptic and is a convert to the less-war position, is sincere when he says that, even though he agrees with much of Trump’s agenda, he cannot stomach Trump. But for most of the other #NeverTrumpers, is it just a coincidence that they also happen to favor Invade the World, Invite the World?
Another question JAG raised without provoking any serious attempt at refutation was whether, in corrupt times, it took a … let’s say ... “loudmouth” to rise above the din of The Megaphone. We, or I, speculated: “yes.” Suppose there had arisen some statesman of high character—dignified, articulate, experienced, knowledgeable—the exact opposite of everything the conservatives claim to hate about Trump. Could this hypothetical paragon have won on Trump’s same issues? Would the conservatives have supported him? I would have—even had he been a Democrat.
Back on planet earth, that flight of fancy at least addresses what to do now. The answer to the subsidiary question—will it work?—is much less clear. By “it” I mean Trumpism, broadly defined as secure borders, economic nationalism, and America-first foreign policy. We Americans have chosen, in our foolishness, to disunite the country through stupid immigration, economic, and foreign policies. The level of unity America enjoyed before the bipartisan junta took over can never be restored.
But we can probably do better than we are doing now. First, stop digging. No more importing poverty, crime, and alien cultures. We have made institutions, by leftist design, not merely abysmal at assimilation but abhorrent of the concept. We should try to fix that, but given the Left’s iron grip on every school and cultural center, that’s like trying to bring democracy to Russia. A worthy goal, perhaps, but temper your hopes—and don’t invest time and resources unrealistically.
By contrast, simply building a wall and enforcing immigration law will help enormously, by cutting off the flood of newcomers that perpetuates ethnic separatism and by incentivizing the English language and American norms in the workplace. These policies will have the added benefit of aligning the economic interests of, and (we may hope) fostering solidarity among, the working, lower middle, and middle classes of all races and ethnicities. The same can be said for Trumpian trade policies and anti-globalization instincts. Who cares if productivity numbers tick down, or if our already somnambulant GDP sinks a bit further into its pillow? Nearly all the gains of the last 20 years have accrued to the junta anyway. It would, at this point, be better for the nation to divide up more equitably a slightly smaller pie than to add one extra slice—only to ensure that it and eight of the other nine go first to the government and its rentiers, and the rest to the same four industries and 200 families.
Will this work? Ask a pessimist, get a pessimistic answer. So don’t ask. Ask instead: is it worth trying? Is it better than the alternative? If you can’t say, forthrightly, “yes,” you are either part of the junta, a fool, or a conservative intellectual.
And if it doesn’t work, what then? We’ve established that most “conservative” anti-Trumpites are in the Orwellian sense objectively pro-Hillary. What about the rest of you? If you recognize the threat she poses, but somehow can’t stomach him, have you thought about the longer term? The possibilities would seem to be: Caesarism, secession/crack-up, collapse, or managerial Davoisie liberalism as far as the eye can see … which, since nothing human lasts forever, at some point will give way to one of the other three. Oh, and, I suppose, for those who like to pour a tall one and dream big, a second American Revolution that restores Constitutionalism, limited government, and a 28% top marginal rate.
But for those of you who are sober: can you sketch a more plausible long-term future than the prior four following a Trump defeat? I can’t either.
The election of 2016 is a test—in my view, the final test—of whether there is any virtù left in what used to be the core of the American nation. If they cannot rouse themselves simply to vote for the first candidate in a generation who pledges to advance their interests, and to vote against the one who openly boasts that she will do the opposite (a million more Syrians, anyone?), then they are doomed. They may not deserve the fate that will befall them, but they will suffer it regardless.
I typically do not copy and paste an entire article - hoping anyone inclined to view the article will travel to the original. But in this case I was struck by the brutal honesty - the notion that WE THE PEOPLE are rushing the "cockpit" (the White House).
Makes me wonder, can we do this without a battle? I know far-fetched but my hope is we will win this war against stupidity - and I am willing to do so at any cost! Are you?
PS - If you do not know what Flight 93 is DO NOT TELL ME just google it and be enlightened!
-------
2016 is the Flight 93 election: charge the cockpit or you die. You may die anyway. You—or the leader of your party—may make it into the cockpit and not know how to fly or land the plane. There are no guarantees.
Except one: if you don’t try, death is certain. To compound the metaphor: a Hillary Clinton presidency is Russian Roulette with a semi-auto. With Trump, at least you can spin the cylinder and take your chances.
To ordinary conservative ears, this sounds histrionic. The stakes can’t be that high because they are never that high—except perhaps in the pages of Gibbon. Conservative intellectuals will insist that there has been no “end of history” and that all human outcomes are still possible. They will even—as Charles Kesler does—admit that America is in “crisis.” But how great is the crisis? Can things really be so bad if eight years of Obama can be followed by eight more of Hillary, and yet Constitutionalist conservatives can still reasonably hope for a restoration of our cherished ideals? Cruz in 2024!
Not to pick (too much) on Kesler, who is less unwarrantedly optimistic than most conservatives. And who, at least, poses the right question: Trump or Hillary? Though his answer—“even if [Trump] had chosen his policies at random, they would be sounder than Hillary’s”—is unwarrantedly ungenerous. The truth is that Trump articulated, if incompletely and inconsistently, the right stances on the right issues—immigration, trade, and war—right from the beginning.
But let us back up. One of the paradoxes—there are so many—of conservative thought over the last decade at least is the unwillingness even to entertain the possibility that America and the West are on a trajectory toward something very bad. On the one hand, conservatives routinely present a litany of ills plaguing the body politic. Illegitimacy. Crime. Massive, expensive, intrusive, out-of-control government. Politically correct McCarthyism. Ever-higher taxes and ever-deteriorating services and infrastructure. Inability to win wars against tribal, sub-Third-World foes. A disastrously awful educational system that churns out kids who don’t know anything and, at the primary and secondary levels, can’t (or won’t) discipline disruptive punks, and at the higher levels saddles students with six figure debts for the privilege. And so on and drearily on. Like that portion of the mass where the priest asks for your private intentions, fill in any dismal fact about American decline that you want and I’ll stipulate it.
Conservatives spend at least several hundred million dollars a year on think-tanks, magazines, conferences, fellowships, and such, complaining about this, that, the other, and everything. And yet these same conservatives are, at root, keepers of the status quo. Oh, sure, they want some things to change. They want their pet ideas adopted—tax deductions for having more babies and the like. Many of them are even good ideas. But are any of them truly fundamental? Do they get to the heart of our problems?
If conservatives are right about the importance of virtue, morality, religious faith, stability, character and so on in the individual; if they are right about sexual morality or what came to be termed “family values”; if they are right about the importance of education to inculcate good character and to teach the fundamentals that have defined knowledge in the West for millennia; if they are right about societal norms and public order; if they are right about the centrality of initiative, enterprise, industry, and thrift to a sound economy and a healthy society; if they are right about the soul-sapping effects of paternalistic Big Government and its cannibalization of civil society and religious institutions; if they are right about the necessity of a strong defense and prudent statesmanship in the international sphere—if they are right about the importance of all this to national health and even survival, then they must believe—mustn’t they?—that we are headed off a cliff.
But it’s quite obvious that conservatives don’t believe any such thing, that they feel no such sense of urgency, of an immediate necessity to change course and avoid the cliff. A recent article by Matthew Continetti may be taken as representative—indeed, almost written for the purpose of illustrating the point. Continetti inquires into the “condition of America” and finds it wanting. What does Continetti propose to do about it? The usual litany of “conservative” “solutions,” with the obligatory references to decentralization, federalization, “civic renewal,” and—of course!—Burke. Which is to say, conservatism’s typical combination of the useless and inapt with the utopian and unrealizable. Decentralization and federalism are all well and good, and as a conservative, I endorse them both without reservation. But how are they going to save, or even meaningfully improve, the America that Continetti describes? What can they do against a tidal wave of dysfunction, immorality, and corruption? “Civic renewal” would do a lot of course, but that’s like saying health will save a cancer patient. A step has been skipped in there somewhere. How are we going to achieve “civic renewal”? Wishing for a tautology to enact itself is not a strategy.
Continetti trips over a more promising approach when he writes of “stress[ing] the ‘national interest abroad and national solidarity at home’ through foreign-policy retrenchment, ‘support to workers buffeted by globalization,’ and setting ‘tax rates and immigration levels’ to foster social cohesion." That sounds a lot like Trumpism. But the phrases that Continetti quotes are taken from Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam, both of whom, like Continetti, are vociferously—one might even say fanatically—anti-Trump. At least they, unlike Kesler, give Trump credit for having identified the right stance on today’s most salient issues. Yet, paradoxically, they won’t vote for Trump whereas Kesler hints that he will. It’s reasonable, then, to read into Kesler’s esoteric endorsement of Trump an implicit acknowledgment that the crisis is, indeed, pretty dire. I expect a Claremont scholar to be wiser than most other conservative intellectuals, and I am relieved not to be disappointed in this instance.
Yet we may also reasonably ask: What explains the Pollyanna-ish declinism of so many others? That is, the stance that Things-Are-Really-Bad—But-Not-So-Bad-that-We-Have-to-Consider-Anything-Really-Different! The obvious answer is that they don’t really believe the first half of that formulation. If so, like Chicken Little, they should stick a sock in it. Pecuniary reasons also suggest themselves, but let us foreswear recourse to this explanation until we have disproved all the others.
Whatever the reason for the contradiction, there can be no doubt that there is a contradiction. To simultaneously hold conservative cultural, economic, and political beliefs—to insist that our liberal-left present reality and future direction is incompatible with human nature and must undermine society—and yet also believe that things can go on more or less the way they are going, ideally but not necessarily with some conservative tinkering here and there, is logically impossible.
Let’s be very blunt here: if you genuinely think things can go on with no fundamental change needed, then you have implicitly admitted that conservatism is wrong. Wrong philosophically, wrong on human nature, wrong on the nature of politics, and wrong in its policy prescriptions. Because, first, few of those prescriptions are in force today. Second, of the ones that are, the left is busy undoing them, often with conservative assistance. And, third, the whole trend of the West is ever-leftward, ever further away from what we all understand as conservatism.
If your answer—Continetti’s, Douthat’s, Salam’s, and so many others’—is for conservatism to keep doing what it’s been doing—another policy journal, another article about welfare reform, another half-day seminar on limited government, another tax credit proposal—even though we’ve been losing ground for at least a century, then you’ve implicitly accepted that your supposed political philosophy doesn’t matter and that civilization will carry on just fine under leftist tenets. Indeed, that leftism is truer than conservatism and superior to it.
They will say, in words reminiscent of dorm-room Marxism—but our proposals have not been tried! Here our ideas sit, waiting to be implemented! To which I reply: eh, not really. Many conservative solutions—above all welfare reform and crime control—have been tried, and proved effective, but have nonetheless failed to stem the tide. Crime, for instance, is down from its mid-’70s and early ’90s peak—but way, way up from the historic American norm that ended when liberals took over criminal justice in the mid-’60s. And it’s rising fast today, in the teeth of ineffectual conservative complaints. And what has this temporary crime (or welfare, for that matter) decline done to stem the greater tide? The tsunami of leftism that still engulfs our every—literal and figurative—shore has receded not a bit but indeed has grown. All your (our) victories are short-lived.
More to the point, what has conservatism achieved lately? In the last 20 years? The answer—which appears to be “nothing”—might seem to lend credence to the plea that “our ideas haven’t been tried.” Except that the same conservatives who generate those ideas are in charge of selling them to the broader public. If their ideas “haven’t been tried,” who is ultimately at fault? The whole enterprise of Conservatism, Inc., reeks of failure. Its sole recent and ongoing success is its own self-preservation. Conservative intellectuals never tire of praising “entrepreneurs” and “creative destruction.” Dare to fail! they exhort businessmen. Let the market decide! Except, um, not with respect to us. Or is their true market not the political arena, but the fundraising circuit?
Only three questions matter. First, how bad are things really? Second, what do we do right now? Third, what should we do for the long term?
Conservatism, Inc.’s, “answer” to the first may, at this point, simply be dismissed. If the conservatives wish to have a serious debate, I for one am game—more than game; eager. The problem of “subjective certainty” can only be overcome by going into the agora. But my attempt to do so—the blog that Kesler mentions—was met largely with incredulity. How can they say that?! How can anyone apparently of our caste (conservative intellectuals) not merely support Trump (however lukewarmly) but offer reasons for doing do?
One of the Journal of American Greatness’s deeper arguments was that only in a corrupt republic, in corrupt times, could a Trump rise. It is therefore puzzling that those most horrified by Trump are the least willing to consider the possibility that the republic is dying. That possibility, apparently, seems to them so preposterous that no refutation is necessary.
As does, presumably, the argument that the stakes in 2016 are—everything. I should here note that I am a good deal gloomier than my (former) JAG colleagues, and that while we frequently used the royal “we” when discussing things on which we all agreed, I here speak only for myself.
How have the last two decades worked out for you, personally? If you’re a member or fellow-traveler of the Davos class, chances are: pretty well. If you’re among the subspecies conservative intellectual or politician, you’ve accepted—perhaps not consciously, but unmistakably—your status on the roster of the Washington Generals of American politics. Your job is to show up and lose, but you are a necessary part of the show and you do get paid. To the extent that you are ever on the winning side of anything, it’s as sophists who help the Davoisie oligarchy rationalize open borders, lower wages, outsourcing, de-industrialization, trade giveaways, and endless, pointless, winless war.
All of Trump’s 16 Republican competitors would have ensured more of the same—as will the election of Hillary Clinton. That would be bad enough. But at least Republicans are merely reactive when it comes to wholesale cultural and political change. Their “opposition” may be in all cases ineffectual and often indistinguishable from support. But they don’t dream up inanities like 32 “genders,” elective bathrooms, single-payer, Iran sycophancy, “Islamophobia,” and Black Lives Matter. They merely help ratify them.
A Hillary presidency will be pedal-to-the-metal on the entire Progressive-left agenda, plus items few of us have yet imagined in our darkest moments. Nor is even that the worst. It will be coupled with a level of vindictive persecution against resistance and dissent hitherto seen in the supposedly liberal West only in the most “advanced” Scandinavian countries and the most leftist corners of Germany and England. We see this already in the censorship practiced by the Davoisie’s social media enablers; in the shameless propaganda tidal wave of the mainstream media; and in the personal destruction campaigns—operated through the former and aided by the latter—of the Social Justice Warriors. We see it in Obama’s flagrant use of the IRS to torment political opponents, the gaslighting denial by the media, and the collective shrug by everyone else.
It’s absurd to assume that any of this would stop or slow—would do anything other than massively intensify—in a Hillary administration. It’s even more ridiculous to expect that hitherto useless conservative opposition would suddenly become effective. For two generations at least, the Left has been calling everyone to their right Nazis. This trend has accelerated exponentially in the last few years, helped along by some on the Right who really do seem to merit—and even relish—the label. There is nothing the modern conservative fears more than being called “racist,” so alt-right pocket Nazis are manna from heaven for the Left. But also wholly unnecessary: sauce for the goose. The Left was calling us Nazis long before any pro-Trumpers tweeted Holocaust denial memes. And how does one deal with a Nazi—that is, with an enemy one is convinced intends your destruction? You don’t compromise with him or leave him alone. You crush him.
So what do we have to lose by fighting back? Only our Washington Generals jerseys—and paychecks. But those are going away anyway. Among the many things the “Right” still doesn’t understand is that the Left has concluded that this particular show need no longer go on. They don’t think they need a foil anymore and would rather dispense with the whole bother of staging these phony contests in which each side ostensibly has a shot.
If you haven’t noticed, our side has been losing consistently since 1988. We can win midterms, but we do nothing with them. Call ours Hannibalic victories. After the Carthaginian’s famous slaughter of a Roman army at Cannae, he failed to march on an undefended Rome, prompting his cavalry commander to complain: “you know how to win a victory, but not how to use one.” And, aside from 2004’s lackluster 50.7%, we can’t win the big ones at all.
Because the deck is stacked overwhelmingly against us. I will mention but three ways. First, the opinion-making elements—the universities and the media above all—are wholly corrupt and wholly opposed to everything we want, and increasingly even to our existence. (What else are the wars on “cis-genderism”—formerly known as “nature”—and on the supposed “white privilege” of broke hillbillies really about?) If it hadn’t been abundantly clear for the last 50 years, the campaign of 2015-2016 must surely have made it evident to even the meanest capacities that the intelligentsia—including all the organs through which it broadcasts its propaganda—is overwhelmingly partisan and biased. Against this onslaught, “conservative” media is a nullity, barely a whisper. It cannot be heard above the blaring of what has been aptly called “The Megaphone.”
Second, our Washington Generals self-handicap and self-censor to an absurd degree. Lenin is supposed to have said that “the best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” But with an opposition like ours, why bother? Our “leaders” and “dissenters” bend over backward to play by the self-sabotaging rules the Left sets for them. Fearful, beaten dogs have more thymos.
Third and most important, the ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners with no tradition of, taste for, or experience in liberty means that the electorate grows more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle. As does, of course, the U.S. population, which only serves to reinforce the two other causes outlined above. This is the core reason why the Left, the Democrats, and the bipartisan junta (categories distinct but very much overlapping) think they are on the cusp of a permanent victory that will forever obviate the need to pretend to respect democratic and constitutional niceties. Because they are.
It’s also why they treat open borders as the “absolute value,” the one “principle” that—when their “principles” collide—they prioritize above all the others. If that fact is insufficiently clear, consider this. Trump is the most liberal Republican nominee since Thomas Dewey. He departs from conservative orthodoxy in so many ways that National Review still hasn’t stopped counting. But let’s stick to just the core issues animating his campaign. On trade, globalization, and war, Trump is to the left (conventionally understood) not only of his own party, but of his Democratic opponent. And yet the Left and the junta are at one with the house-broken conservatives in their determination—desperation—not merely to defeat Trump but to destroy him. What gives?
Oh, right—there’s that other issue. The sacredness of mass immigration is the mystic chord that unites America’s ruling and intellectual classes. Their reasons vary somewhat. The Left and the Democrats seek ringers to form a permanent electoral majority. They, or many of them, also believe the academic-intellectual lie that America’s inherently racist and evil nature can be expiated only through ever greater “diversity.” The junta of course craves cheaper and more docile labor. It also seeks to legitimize, and deflect unwanted attention from, its wealth and power by pretending that its open borders stance is a form of noblesse oblige. The Republicans and the “conservatives”? Both of course desperately want absolution from the charge of “racism.” For the latter, this at least makes some sense. No Washington General can take the court—much less cash his check—with that epithet dancing over his head like some Satanic Spirit. But for the former, this priestly grace comes at the direct expense of their worldly interests. Do they honestly believe that the right enterprise zone or charter school policy will arouse 50.01% of our newer voters to finally reveal their “natural conservatism” at the ballot box? It hasn’t happened anywhere yet and shows no signs that it ever will. But that doesn’t stop the Republican refrain: more, more, more! No matter how many elections they lose, how many districts tip forever blue, how rarely (if ever) their immigrant vote cracks 40%, the answer is always the same. Just like Angela Merkel after yet another rape, shooting, bombing, or machete attack. More, more, more!
This is insane. This is the mark of a party, a society, a country, a people, a civilization that wants to die. Trump, alone among candidates for high office in this or in the last seven (at least) cycles, has stood up to say: I want to live. I want my party to live. I want my country to live. I want my people to live. I want to end the insanity.
Yes, Trump is worse than imperfect. So what? We can lament until we choke the lack of a great statesman to address the fundamental issues of our time—or, more importantly, to connect them. Since Pat Buchanan’s three failures, occasionally a candidate arose who saw one piece: Dick Gephardt on trade, Ron Paul on war, Tom Tancredo on immigration. Yet, among recent political figures—great statesmen, dangerous demagogues, and mewling gnats alike—only Trump-the-alleged-buffoon not merely saw all three and their essential connectivity, but was able to win on them. The alleged buffoon is thus more prudent—more practically wise—than all of our wise-and-good who so bitterly oppose him. This should embarrass them. That their failures instead embolden them is only further proof of their foolishness and hubris.
Which they self-laud as “consistency”—adherence to “conservative principle,” defined by the 1980 campaign and the household gods of reigning conservative think-tanks. A higher consistency in the service of the national interest apparently eludes them. When America possessed a vast, empty continent and explosively growing industry, high immigration was arguably good policy. (Arguably: Ben Franklin would disagree.) It hasn’t made sense since World War I. Free trade was unquestionably a great boon to the American worker in the decades after World War II. We long ago passed the point of diminishing returns. The Gulf War of 1991 was a strategic victory for American interests. No conflict since then has been. Conservatives either can’t see this—or, worse, those who can nonetheless treat the only political leader to mount a serious challenge to the status quo (more immigration, more trade, more war) as a unique evil.
Trump’s vulgarity is in fact a godsend to the conservatives. It allows them to hang their public opposition on his obvious shortcomings and to ignore or downplay his far greater strengths, which should be even more obvious but in corrupt times can be deliberately obscured by constant references to his faults. That the Left would make the campaign all about the latter is to be expected. Why would the Right? Some—a few—are no doubt sincere in their belief that the man is simply unfit for high office. David Frum, who has always been an immigration skeptic and is a convert to the less-war position, is sincere when he says that, even though he agrees with much of Trump’s agenda, he cannot stomach Trump. But for most of the other #NeverTrumpers, is it just a coincidence that they also happen to favor Invade the World, Invite the World?
Another question JAG raised without provoking any serious attempt at refutation was whether, in corrupt times, it took a … let’s say ... “loudmouth” to rise above the din of The Megaphone. We, or I, speculated: “yes.” Suppose there had arisen some statesman of high character—dignified, articulate, experienced, knowledgeable—the exact opposite of everything the conservatives claim to hate about Trump. Could this hypothetical paragon have won on Trump’s same issues? Would the conservatives have supported him? I would have—even had he been a Democrat.
Back on planet earth, that flight of fancy at least addresses what to do now. The answer to the subsidiary question—will it work?—is much less clear. By “it” I mean Trumpism, broadly defined as secure borders, economic nationalism, and America-first foreign policy. We Americans have chosen, in our foolishness, to disunite the country through stupid immigration, economic, and foreign policies. The level of unity America enjoyed before the bipartisan junta took over can never be restored.
But we can probably do better than we are doing now. First, stop digging. No more importing poverty, crime, and alien cultures. We have made institutions, by leftist design, not merely abysmal at assimilation but abhorrent of the concept. We should try to fix that, but given the Left’s iron grip on every school and cultural center, that’s like trying to bring democracy to Russia. A worthy goal, perhaps, but temper your hopes—and don’t invest time and resources unrealistically.
By contrast, simply building a wall and enforcing immigration law will help enormously, by cutting off the flood of newcomers that perpetuates ethnic separatism and by incentivizing the English language and American norms in the workplace. These policies will have the added benefit of aligning the economic interests of, and (we may hope) fostering solidarity among, the working, lower middle, and middle classes of all races and ethnicities. The same can be said for Trumpian trade policies and anti-globalization instincts. Who cares if productivity numbers tick down, or if our already somnambulant GDP sinks a bit further into its pillow? Nearly all the gains of the last 20 years have accrued to the junta anyway. It would, at this point, be better for the nation to divide up more equitably a slightly smaller pie than to add one extra slice—only to ensure that it and eight of the other nine go first to the government and its rentiers, and the rest to the same four industries and 200 families.
Will this work? Ask a pessimist, get a pessimistic answer. So don’t ask. Ask instead: is it worth trying? Is it better than the alternative? If you can’t say, forthrightly, “yes,” you are either part of the junta, a fool, or a conservative intellectual.
And if it doesn’t work, what then? We’ve established that most “conservative” anti-Trumpites are in the Orwellian sense objectively pro-Hillary. What about the rest of you? If you recognize the threat she poses, but somehow can’t stomach him, have you thought about the longer term? The possibilities would seem to be: Caesarism, secession/crack-up, collapse, or managerial Davoisie liberalism as far as the eye can see … which, since nothing human lasts forever, at some point will give way to one of the other three. Oh, and, I suppose, for those who like to pour a tall one and dream big, a second American Revolution that restores Constitutionalism, limited government, and a 28% top marginal rate.
But for those of you who are sober: can you sketch a more plausible long-term future than the prior four following a Trump defeat? I can’t either.
The election of 2016 is a test—in my view, the final test—of whether there is any virtù left in what used to be the core of the American nation. If they cannot rouse themselves simply to vote for the first candidate in a generation who pledges to advance their interests, and to vote against the one who openly boasts that she will do the opposite (a million more Syrians, anyone?), then they are doomed. They may not deserve the fate that will befall them, but they will suffer it regardless.
Thursday, August 18, 2016
Saturday, August 13, 2016
Thursday, August 11, 2016
Tuesday, August 9, 2016
Julian Assange on Seth Rich
There was a 27 year old who works for the DNC was shot in the back, murdered, in DC just a few weeks ago. ..... I am suggesting that our sources take risks and they become concerned when seeing things like that. We have to understand how high the stakes are in the U.S. Our sources face serious risks and that is why they come to us because they expect we will respect their anonymity.
Sunday, August 7, 2016
Saturday, July 30, 2016
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Free North Carolina: The New Iron Curtain: Our new cold war with Russia risks World War III ( June 20, 2016 )
The New Iron Curtain: Our new cold war with Russia risks World War III
Does #hussein WANT a war with Russia? America wouldn't tollerate the enemy knocking at iur door repeatedly!
Does #hussein WANT a war with Russia? America wouldn't tollerate the enemy knocking at iur door repeatedly!
Friday, June 24, 2016
Free North Carolina: Trump v Clinton
Trump v Clinton
More and more, Americans will reach the same conclusion many of us alreadyhave, Trump is PRO-American and offers solutions to problems. Hillary Clinton, will continue the ANTI-American
policies of the present Obama administration that in too many cases, CAUSE the problems in the first place. As Reagan aptly noted:
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
In the simplest terms, even ignoring what might happen with the various Hillary Clinton scandals and criminal investigations, this election will pit a populist Pro-American against a socialist Anti-American. The Brits just dumped the anti-Brit controllers in Brussels. We can't afford not to do the same here.
More and more, Americans will reach the same conclusion many of us alreadyhave, Trump is PRO-American and offers solutions to problems. Hillary Clinton, will continue the ANTI-American
policies of the present Obama administration that in too many cases, CAUSE the problems in the first place. As Reagan aptly noted:
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
In the simplest terms, even ignoring what might happen with the various Hillary Clinton scandals and criminal investigations, this election will pit a populist Pro-American against a socialist Anti-American. The Brits just dumped the anti-Brit controllers in Brussels. We can't afford not to do the same here.
Sunday, June 19, 2016
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Saturday, June 11, 2016
Free North Carolina: Israel Weapon Industries to Exhibit X95 Assault Rifle in .300 AAC Blackout Caliber
Israel Weapon Industries to Exhibit X95 Assault Rifle in .300 AAC Blackout Caliber
"For the first time at Eurosatory, the company will present the X95 (MICRO TAVOR) assault rifle in .300 AAC Blackout caliber – making the X95 a multi-caliber platform with the ability to switch to any of 4 calibers (5.56X45mm, 9mm, 5.45X39mm, and now – 7.62×35 mm).
The conversion is easily accomplished, requiring only a change of the barrel.
Due to the fact that the BLK 300 and the 5.56mm ammunition have the same dimensions, they both use the same standard AR magazine. Since a wide variety of ammunition can be used for the BLK 300 caliber, the rifle can be silenced at a very high level, which is not possible with the current 5.56mm ammunition."
Thursday, June 9, 2016
Free North Carolina: Trump on Track to Win More Black Votes Than Any GOP Candidate Since 1960
Trump on Track to Win More Black Votes Than Any GOP Candidate Since 1960
#Trump2016
A new poll by Big Data and posted at FOX Latina found Donald Trump has 26% support from African Americans.
As reported previously…
Blacks today make up 22% of the Democratic vote. If Democrats lost 25% of the black vote they would lose Virginia, Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.
Washington Post)
If Trump skims 25% of black voters from the Democratic Party he would win the 2016 election in a landslide.
The last Republican to win over 25 percent of the non-white vote wasRichard Nixon in 1960.
Nixon won 32% of non-white voters to Kennedy’s 68%.
The black community in America has been in decline ever since.
Maybe blacks have finally had enough?
#Trump2016
A new poll by Big Data and posted at FOX Latina found Donald Trump has 26% support from African Americans.
As reported previously…
Blacks today make up 22% of the Democratic vote. If Democrats lost 25% of the black vote they would lose Virginia, Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.
Washington Post)
If Trump skims 25% of black voters from the Democratic Party he would win the 2016 election in a landslide.
The last Republican to win over 25 percent of the non-white vote wasRichard Nixon in 1960.
Nixon won 32% of non-white voters to Kennedy’s 68%.
The black community in America has been in decline ever since.
Maybe blacks have finally had enough?
Free North Carolina: Royal Navy intercepts Russia submarine in the Straits of Dover
Royal Navy intercepts Russia submarine in the Straits of Dover
"British Navy crews from HMS Kent raced to intercept the Soviet sub, which was also stocked with tornadoes, just days before Euro 2016 kicks off.
The ruthless Russian leader’s latest act of aggression comes ahead of England’s opening game against Russia on Saturday.
Military insiders say the deadly submarine – which has the capability to launch surface-to-air missiles – had been monitored since Sunday when it left its base in Severmorsk, northern Russia.
It was accosted by HMH Kent as it made its way down England’s eastern coastline."
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Hope n' Change Cartoons: Okey Doke from Muskogeedoke
Hope n' Change Cartoons: Okey Doke from Muskogeedoke
I actually say okey-doke on a regular basis. But have never heard of it referred to as #hussein did. For me it is the same as "all right", "you got it", as in me given an instruction/objective and I agree it will happen.
"... after nearly 8 years, Hope n' Change is finally taking the unprecedented step of actually agreeingwith something Barack Obama has said:"Don't fall for the okey-doke." Not now, not ever again.
Wait - what's that you say? You don't actually know what okey-doke means...?
Well, truthfully, we're not sure either. But we suspect it might be Kenyan for "bullshit.""
I actually say okey-doke on a regular basis. But have never heard of it referred to as #hussein did. For me it is the same as "all right", "you got it", as in me given an instruction/objective and I agree it will happen.
"... after nearly 8 years, Hope n' Change is finally taking the unprecedented step of actually agreeingwith something Barack Obama has said:"Don't fall for the okey-doke." Not now, not ever again.
Wait - what's that you say? You don't actually know what okey-doke means...?
Well, truthfully, we're not sure either. But we suspect it might be Kenyan for "bullshit.""
Free North Carolina: US hiring grinds to a near-halt; many stop looking for work
US hiring grinds to a near-halt; many stop looking for work
"Less-educated workers bore the brunt of the hiring slump, with a quarter-million high school dropouts losing their jobs in May. That has perpetuated a long-term trend toward a two-tiered job market, with college-educated adults more likely to be employed and earning steady raises."
"Less-educated workers bore the brunt of the hiring slump, with a quarter-million high school dropouts losing their jobs in May. That has perpetuated a long-term trend toward a two-tiered job market, with college-educated adults more likely to be employed and earning steady raises."
Monday, May 30, 2016
Free North Carolina: A first look at America’s supergun
A first look at America’s supergun
"The future challenge for the U.S. military, in broad terms, is maintaining a global reach with declining numbers of Navy ships and land forces. Growing expenses and fixed budgets make it more difficult to maintain large forces in the right places to deter aggression.
“I can’t conceive of a future where we would replicate Cold War forces in Europe,” said Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work, one of the weapon’s chief boosters. “But I could conceive of a set of railguns that would be inexpensive but would have enormous deterrent value. They would have value against airplanes, missiles, tanks, almost anything.”
Inside the test bunker at Dahlgren, military officials turned to the video monitor showing the rectangular railgun barrel. Engineer Tom Boucher, program manager for the railgun in the Office of Naval Research, explained: “We are watching the system charge. We are taking power from the grid.”
Wires splay out the back of the railgun, which requires a power plant that generates 25 megawatts—enough electricity to power 18,750 homes.
The siren blared again, and the weapon fired. The video replay was slowed so officials could see aluminum shavings ignite in a fireball and the projectile emerge from its protective shell."
Sunday, May 29, 2016
Saturday, May 21, 2016
Free North Carolina: Islamic Doctrine Governing Women Submission, Marriage, Sex, and Slavery
Free North Carolina: Islamic Doctrine Governing Women Submission, Marriage, Sex, and Slavery
"Horrific as it may seem, there is no penalty under Islamic Law for a Muslim male who rapes an unbelieving woman, for example a hapless young Swedish woman, who has wandered too near a No-Go zone in Malmo, dominated by Sharia Law.. Yet in several European countries, most notably Sweden, Germany, and the UK, the fear of local authorities of being called racists, has overcome their responsibility to protect women and children"
"Horrific as it may seem, there is no penalty under Islamic Law for a Muslim male who rapes an unbelieving woman, for example a hapless young Swedish woman, who has wandered too near a No-Go zone in Malmo, dominated by Sharia Law.. Yet in several European countries, most notably Sweden, Germany, and the UK, the fear of local authorities of being called racists, has overcome their responsibility to protect women and children"
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Monday, May 9, 2016
Free North Carolina: Nationalism, Old and New
Free North Carolina: Nationalism, Old and New
The principal opponents of nationalism in American history have been republicans, and it is one of the ironies of our history that the political party that claims the republic.
The principal opponents of nationalism in American history have been republicans, and it is one of the ironies of our history that the political party that claims the republic.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Free North Carolina: "They Fought Like Demons" (Confederate Female Soldiers)
Free North Carolina: "They Fought Like Demons" (Confederate Female Soldiers)
Another She-Devil shot her way to our breastworks with two large revolvers dealing death all in her path... she pulled out the largest pig-sticker I ever seen...When the Corporal tried to shoot her she kicked him in the face smashing it quite severely. Then she stabbed three boys and was about to decapitate a fourth when the Lieutenant killed her. Without doubt this gal inflicted more damage to our line than any other reb.
Another She-Devil shot her way to our breastworks with two large revolvers dealing death all in her path... she pulled out the largest pig-sticker I ever seen...When the Corporal tried to shoot her she kicked him in the face smashing it quite severely. Then she stabbed three boys and was about to decapitate a fourth when the Lieutenant killed her. Without doubt this gal inflicted more damage to our line than any other reb.
Monday, April 25, 2016
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Saturday, April 16, 2016
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Sunday, April 10, 2016
Friday, April 8, 2016
Tuesday, April 5, 2016
Free North Carolina: By 2065, No Racial or Ethnic Group Will Be a Majority
By 2065, No Racial or Ethnic Group Will Be a Majority
It will be ok - my grandson MJP III will be #POTUS2052
It will be ok - my grandson MJP III will be #POTUS2052
Thursday, March 31, 2016
Free North Carolina: Saudi Prince: Will Support Israel in a Intifada With Palestine
Free North Carolina: Saudi Prince: Will Support Israel in a Intifada With Palestine
Many turn to the God of #Israel during tough times! He acts like he is doing Israel a "favor", when in reality he is seeking the protection of Israel against his Arabic brethren.
Many turn to the God of #Israel during tough times! He acts like he is doing Israel a "favor", when in reality he is seeking the protection of Israel against his Arabic brethren.
Sunday, March 27, 2016
HOUSTON: Muslim Dairy Queen owner puts up signs comparing Hindus to monkeys
Where are the libs They are not screaming discrimination
HOUSTON: Muslim Dairy Queen owner puts up signs comparing Hindus to monkeys
HOUSTON: Muslim Dairy Queen owner puts up signs comparing Hindus to monkeys
Friday, March 25, 2016
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Thursday, March 17, 2016
NC and the Politics of Barbecue
Free North Carolina: North Carolina and the Politics of Barbecue:
As a Greensboro native, I just want my Stamey's with red coleslaw!!
In our state the linkage between politics and barbecue dates back at least to 1766, when the governor appointed by the king, William Tryon, tried to win the good will of citizens annoyed by the Stamp Act by laying on a barbecue in Wilmington. (It didn’t work: The local Sons of Liberty poured out the beer and threw the barbecued ox in the river. Note that this was a full seven years before the Boston Tea Party, which gets all the publicity.)
As a Greensboro native, I just want my Stamey's with red coleslaw!!
In our state the linkage between politics and barbecue dates back at least to 1766, when the governor appointed by the king, William Tryon, tried to win the good will of citizens annoyed by the Stamp Act by laying on a barbecue in Wilmington. (It didn’t work: The local Sons of Liberty poured out the beer and threw the barbecued ox in the river. Note that this was a full seven years before the Boston Tea Party, which gets all the publicity.)
Burns Chronicles No 13 Ambush – “We Feared for Somebody’s Life”
Free North Carolina: Burns Chronicles No 13 Ambush – Part 2 “We Feared for Somebody’s Life”:
The Press Conference begins, after showing synchronized footage from Shawna Cox’s camera and the previously shown aerial footage. The only words spoken in the first 3 minutes are those of LaVoy Finicum, Shawna Cox, Victoria Sharp, and Ryan Bundy. LaVoy says, at least 7 times, five of them loudly and directed at the then unidentified armed, battle-geared, agents who have taken Mark McConnell, Brian Cavalier, Ammon Bundy, and Ryan Payne, captive. He says that he is going to go to John Day to meet the Sheriff.
The Press Conference begins, after showing synchronized footage from Shawna Cox’s camera and the previously shown aerial footage. The only words spoken in the first 3 minutes are those of LaVoy Finicum, Shawna Cox, Victoria Sharp, and Ryan Bundy. LaVoy says, at least 7 times, five of them loudly and directed at the then unidentified armed, battle-geared, agents who have taken Mark McConnell, Brian Cavalier, Ammon Bundy, and Ryan Payne, captive. He says that he is going to go to John Day to meet the Sheriff.
Tuskegee Confederate Memorial - not going anywhere
Free North Carolina: The Tuskegee Confederate Memorial:
For anyone with a casual knowledge about Alabama’s juicy and active history, the words “Tuskegee” and “Confederate” seem to be an odd match. Tuskegee, Alabama is the site of Booker T. Washington’s visionary Tuskegee Institute, the home of the legendary Tuskegee Airmen, and the location of the first integrated public high school in Alabama. And yet, the center of town is dominated by a city block-sized park under the watchful and protective gaze of a brave and honorable Confederate soldier.
At the very least, he is a soldier who should be commended for his survival of the carnage of late concerning Confederate Memorials throughout the South. And although (as of this writing) the Alabama House recently passed legislation requiring local governments to get the state’s permission before removing any historical monuments (Alabama Heritage Preservation Act), this lone and dedicated soldier has managed to hold off many vicious attacks over the last 60 years about his presence. He doesn’t need the legislature’s help. He’s not going anywhere.
For anyone with a casual knowledge about Alabama’s juicy and active history, the words “Tuskegee” and “Confederate” seem to be an odd match. Tuskegee, Alabama is the site of Booker T. Washington’s visionary Tuskegee Institute, the home of the legendary Tuskegee Airmen, and the location of the first integrated public high school in Alabama. And yet, the center of town is dominated by a city block-sized park under the watchful and protective gaze of a brave and honorable Confederate soldier.
At the very least, he is a soldier who should be commended for his survival of the carnage of late concerning Confederate Memorials throughout the South. And although (as of this writing) the Alabama House recently passed legislation requiring local governments to get the state’s permission before removing any historical monuments (Alabama Heritage Preservation Act), this lone and dedicated soldier has managed to hold off many vicious attacks over the last 60 years about his presence. He doesn’t need the legislature’s help. He’s not going anywhere.
The Abolitionist Secessionist?
Free North Carolina: The Abolitionist Secessionist?:
Lysander Spooner was a Boston legal scholar and philosopher during the nineteenth century. What makes this man of Massachusetts valuable to the legacy of the Southern tradition is that Spooner was a consistent proponent of Jeffersonian Classical Liberalism*. There are two characteristics that are the most prominent to Lysander Spooner and his works. The first is his strong individualist personality. The second is his uncompromising dedication to the use of reason and evidence in the formation of his conclusions. Spooner would never shy from controversy in the name of defending morals or logic, and this dedication makes his works stimulating and often enjoyable for anyone of any degree of interest in studying them. Lysander Spooner was indeed a great philosopher and scholar both in his and our time.
Lysander Spooner was a Boston legal scholar and philosopher during the nineteenth century. What makes this man of Massachusetts valuable to the legacy of the Southern tradition is that Spooner was a consistent proponent of Jeffersonian Classical Liberalism*. There are two characteristics that are the most prominent to Lysander Spooner and his works. The first is his strong individualist personality. The second is his uncompromising dedication to the use of reason and evidence in the formation of his conclusions. Spooner would never shy from controversy in the name of defending morals or logic, and this dedication makes his works stimulating and often enjoyable for anyone of any degree of interest in studying them. Lysander Spooner was indeed a great philosopher and scholar both in his and our time.
Monday, March 14, 2016
Judy Morris Report: Sleazy Lying Cruz Attacks Trump
Love that the Donald's grandfather was an immigrant that ran a brothel (or two) he he
Judy Morris Report: Sleazy Lying Ted Cruz Attacks Trump for Being Gran...: Every day Ted Cruz reaches new lows in outright lies, misinformation, disinformation and twisting the facts. His latest rant has b...
Judy Morris Report: Sleazy Lying Ted Cruz Attacks Trump for Being Gran...: Every day Ted Cruz reaches new lows in outright lies, misinformation, disinformation and twisting the facts. His latest rant has b...
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Trump Nation Sick ‘N Tired of Racial Sadomasochism
Loved the article but the comments made me laugh
"Van Jones was having a tantrum on TV.
The former special advisor for green jobs to Barack Obama, and all-round politically privileged and successful African-American, was demanding that Donald Trump, forthwith, get “passionate” about the black community."
"Van Jones was having a tantrum on TV.
The former special advisor for green jobs to Barack Obama, and all-round politically privileged and successful African-American, was demanding that Donald Trump, forthwith, get “passionate” about the black community."
Such as (paraphrased):
Van must not have found any "Black Privilege" when he went to live in the communist nation created by the Castro bothers he he
Free North Carolina: Trump Nation Sick ‘N Tired of Racial Sadomasochism
Free North Carolina: Trump Nation Sick ‘N Tired of Racial Sadomasochism
Friday, March 4, 2016
Free North Carolina: GOP BOSSES SPIT IN THE VOTERS' FACES
Free North Carolina: GOP BOSSES SPIT IN THE VOTERS' FACES: You're not fighting Trump.
You're fighting the people who are voting for him.
The anti-Trump effort being waged by the Republican Party is essentially a fight against democracy.
It's not that this monster has raised himself up to threaten the ivory castles of the blue bloods, it's that millions of people have stood up and said, “Enough is enough.”
It is they against whom the GOP establishment is fighting.
And that fight never turns out well.
Donald Trump isn't Barry Goldwater in 1964, he is Andrew Jackson in 1828. He is going to storm the White House, and he is going to bring his unwashed hordes with him. The Trump campaign is built on the uniquely American premise that the people are sovereign, and that does not jibe with cozy arrangements of the country-club Republicans. For too long, the Republican Party has exploited its constituencies, instead of served them, and the beaten dog is about to bite.
Some have gone off after Ted Cruz, but most have gone off after Donald Trump.
Together, something approaching 80 percent of Republican voters thus far this primary season have told the party establishment to pound salt. You have the clueless elite, and then you have the voters who actually care about America.
You're fighting the people who are voting for him.
The anti-Trump effort being waged by the Republican Party is essentially a fight against democracy.
It's not that this monster has raised himself up to threaten the ivory castles of the blue bloods, it's that millions of people have stood up and said, “Enough is enough.”
It is they against whom the GOP establishment is fighting.
And that fight never turns out well.
Donald Trump isn't Barry Goldwater in 1964, he is Andrew Jackson in 1828. He is going to storm the White House, and he is going to bring his unwashed hordes with him. The Trump campaign is built on the uniquely American premise that the people are sovereign, and that does not jibe with cozy arrangements of the country-club Republicans. For too long, the Republican Party has exploited its constituencies, instead of served them, and the beaten dog is about to bite.
Some have gone off after Ted Cruz, but most have gone off after Donald Trump.
Together, something approaching 80 percent of Republican voters thus far this primary season have told the party establishment to pound salt. You have the clueless elite, and then you have the voters who actually care about America.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Tuesday, March 1, 2016
Monday, February 29, 2016
McConnell Preparing to Have GOP Senators Break with Trump – 'Nox & Friends
"The GOP establishment is hell bent on destroying both Trump and Cruz, even if it results in a Hillary victory. Wrap your head around that.
McConnell Preparing to Have GOP Senators Break with Trump – 'Nox & Friends
The establishment’s first pick was Jeb Bush who quickly flushed $100 million away, and then dropped out of the race because the voters rejected him. Next at bat was Marco Rubio who is also not resonating with the voters. The big money donors have refused to flush more money down the drain. Their naked desperation is evident as the polls show that Rubio probably won’t win much of anything at all. Meanwhile, Cruz and Trump keep rising in the polls only because the voters are revolting. The results from this Tuesday will be telling."
McConnell Preparing to Have GOP Senators Break with Trump – 'Nox & Friends
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Jude Law's minders attacked by Calais Jungle migrants during charity visit - Mirror Online
Calais is the last French city before UK... there are thousands of refugees The Brits are destroying the camp to try to discourage further camps and entrance into Britain.
Jude Law's minders attacked by Calais Jungle migrants during charity visit - Mirror Online
Saturday, February 27, 2016
Friday, February 26, 2016
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Michigan: Woman arraigned in anti-Muslim bombing hoax in Dearbornistan | Creeping Sharia
So they make up the anti-muckfuzzie protesting
Tells me maybe we #Infidels are not doing enough!
Michigan: Woman arraigned in anti-Muslim bombing hoax in Dearbornistan | Creeping Sharia
Tells me maybe we #Infidels are not doing enough!
Michigan: Woman arraigned in anti-Muslim bombing hoax in Dearbornistan | Creeping Sharia
Donald Trump Is Right – Here Are 100 Reasons Why We Need To Audit The Federal Reserve
"It is so important to audit The Federal Reserve, and yet Ted Cruz missed the vote on the bill that would allow this to be done.
Donald Trump Is Right – Here Are 100 Reasons Why We Need To Audit The Federal Reserve
Donald Trump Is Right – Here Are 100 Reasons Why We Need To Audit The Federal Reserve
U.S. Marine Combat Veteran banned from daughter’s graduation because he exposed to the media the school’s program of Islamic indoctrination in the classroom
How have we become a nation that defends islam and NOT a parent protecting his child!?
U.S. Marine Combat Veteran banned from daughter’s graduation because he exposed to the media the school’s program of Islamic indoctrination in the classroom
U.S. Marine Combat Veteran banned from daughter’s graduation because he exposed to the media the school’s program of Islamic indoctrination in the classroom
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Preparing Our Kids for the Future | Liberty Blitzkrieg
"In my attempt to play a small role in this process, here are 7 skills I think are important to help children think for themselves:"
Preparing Our Kids for the Future | Liberty Blitzkrieg
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Wednesday, February 17, 2016
Tuesday, February 16, 2016
muslim terrorist - just the facts liberals despise
liberals do not want to hear the facts -- they are more comfortable with the lies
muslim terrorist invasion - just the facts
ARKANSAS: Why does an alleged ‘Christian’ woman decide to wear a Muslim headbag in public everyday?
Always remember and never forget -- the "religion of peace" encourages its followers to SLEIGH THE UNBELIEVERS!
That is YOU AND I -- the #Infidels!
ARKANSAS: Why does an alleged ‘Christian’ woman decide to wear a Muslim headbag in public everyday?
That is YOU AND I -- the #Infidels!
ARKANSAS: Why does an alleged ‘Christian’ woman decide to wear a Muslim headbag in public everyday?
Monday, February 15, 2016
Judy Morris Report: The Top 10 Reasons to Vote for Trump
#4 Trump Is The Only Republican Who Stands a Chance of Defeating Hillary Clinton (or Bernie Sanders) in a General Election The POTUS general election is likely be close, very close, and will boil down to 6-8 critical swing states. The POTUS kingmakers will be independent voters (they always are) and whoever can win over a percentage of the African American vote. While the Dems tend to have a lock on both constituencies, there is no guarantee that they will vote Democrat. In fact, polls have disclosed that 20% of Dems would vote for Trump over Clinton.
Judy Morris Report: The Top 10 Reasons to Vote for Trump: As a Ron Paul and Rand Paul supporter, I'm disillusioned with the political system, the systemic corruption of the RNC and DNC m...
The Guns of U.S. Presidents
Happy President's Day!!
The Guns of U.S. Presidents: It wasn’t that long ago when firearms were not only welcome in the executive mansion, but at least eight of our Chief Executives were proud of their NRA Life member status.
The Guns of U.S. Presidents: It wasn’t that long ago when firearms were not only welcome in the executive mansion, but at least eight of our Chief Executives were proud of their NRA Life member status.
Friday, February 12, 2016
Thursday, February 11, 2016
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Tuesday, February 9, 2016
TEXAS: Leftist judge blocks Governor’s second effort to stop Syrian Muslim refugees from being dumped in his state by the Obama Regime
Can Texas refuse them state paid welfare?
TEXAS: Leftist judge blocks Governor’s second effort to stop Syrian Muslim refugees from being dumped in his state by the Obama Regime
TEXAS: Leftist judge blocks Governor’s second effort to stop Syrian Muslim refugees from being dumped in his state by the Obama Regime
Monday, February 8, 2016
CANADA’s stealth Muslim Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, will end all military action against ISIS and use Canadian military bases to house as many as 50,000 Muslim invaders every year
DISGUSTING! In Germany now, even 75-year-old women cannot ride the subway without getting sexually harassed by young Muslim invaders
Coming to America
DISGUSTING! In Germany now, even 75-year-old women cannot ride the subway without getting sexually harassed by young Muslim invaders
I am an #Infidel
DISGUSTING! In Germany now, even 75-year-old women cannot ride the subway without getting sexually harassed by young Muslim invaders
I am an #Infidel
Separation In Place
Free North Carolina: Separation In Place
Will American #Infidels be able to live with #muslim #terrorists?
I say NOT A CHANCE! #muckfuzzies want to destroy ALL Infidels
"Separating in place means creating a society within a society. A civilisation within a civilisation. Although we may have to co-exist within the physical boundaries of an existing system, we become increasingly divorced from it as our strength grows. It means taking responsibility for our community and our interests ourselves, instead of abdicating them to a government and a system which is showing itself as increasingly disinterested, amoral and hostile. Is there a moral difference between those who invade our communities and those who invite and encourage them to do so, and subsequently turn a blind eye to the crimes they commit?"
Will American #Infidels be able to live with #muslim #terrorists?
I say NOT A CHANCE! #muckfuzzies want to destroy ALL Infidels
"Separating in place means creating a society within a society. A civilisation within a civilisation. Although we may have to co-exist within the physical boundaries of an existing system, we become increasingly divorced from it as our strength grows. It means taking responsibility for our community and our interests ourselves, instead of abdicating them to a government and a system which is showing itself as increasingly disinterested, amoral and hostile. Is there a moral difference between those who invade our communities and those who invite and encourage them to do so, and subsequently turn a blind eye to the crimes they commit?"
US, Russia “Base Wars” In Syria As Turkey Allegedly Prepares For Invasion
Free North Carolina: U.S., Russia “Base Wars” In Syria As Turkey Allegedly Prepares For Invasion
But just where will the US be in all this? I don't think it will be on the side of victory under the current administration.
But just where will the US be in all this? I don't think it will be on the side of victory under the current administration.
Sunday, February 7, 2016
Saturday, February 6, 2016
Friday, February 5, 2016
Pistols for Women Who Carry
"No doubt many women are driven by fear to carry a weapon, but common sense and logic play a big part as well. When there are nutjobs running around shooting up churches, schools and other facilities, it’s logical to be prepared, rather than become another victim. It’s obvious even to the most ignorant gun control nuts that cops can’t be everywhere preventing break-ins, assaults or mass shootings, but what is not so obvious to those guys is what a huge role self-reliance can play in defending yourself and others."
Read more here
"Who is Donald Trump?"
Perfect? Not a chance.
Has kahunas? Without a doubt.
Politically correct? Not a chance.
Woke up many Americans? Without a doubt.
Free North Carolina: "Who is Donald Trump?": The better question may be, "What is Donald Trump?"
The answer: A giant middle finger from average Americans to the political and media establishment.
Some Trump supporters are like the 60s white girls who dated black guys just to annoy their parents. But most Trump supporters have simply had it with the Demosocialists and the "Republicans in Name Only."
They know there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Hillary Rodham and Jeb Bush, and only a few cents worth between Rodham and the other GOP candidates.
Ben Carson is not an "establishment" candidate, but the Clinton machine would pulverize Carson, and the somewhat rebellious Ted Cruz will (justifiably so) be tied up with natural born citizen lawsuits (as might Marco Rubio).
Millions of conservatives are justifiably furious. They gave the Republicans control of the House in 2010 and control of the Senate in 2014 and have seen them govern no differently than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
Has kahunas? Without a doubt.
Politically correct? Not a chance.
Woke up many Americans? Without a doubt.
Free North Carolina: "Who is Donald Trump?": The better question may be, "What is Donald Trump?"
The answer: A giant middle finger from average Americans to the political and media establishment.
Some Trump supporters are like the 60s white girls who dated black guys just to annoy their parents. But most Trump supporters have simply had it with the Demosocialists and the "Republicans in Name Only."
They know there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Hillary Rodham and Jeb Bush, and only a few cents worth between Rodham and the other GOP candidates.
Ben Carson is not an "establishment" candidate, but the Clinton machine would pulverize Carson, and the somewhat rebellious Ted Cruz will (justifiably so) be tied up with natural born citizen lawsuits (as might Marco Rubio).
Millions of conservatives are justifiably furious. They gave the Republicans control of the House in 2010 and control of the Senate in 2014 and have seen them govern no differently than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
22 signs the GLOBAL Economy is failing
1. The number of job cuts in the United States skyrocketed 218 percent during the month of January according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas.
2. The Baltic Dry Index just hit yet another brand new all-time record low. As I write this article, it is sitting at 303.
3. U.S. factory orders have now dropped for 14 months in a row.
4. In the U.S., the Restaurant Performance Index just fell to the lowest level that we have seen since 2008.
5. In January, orders for class 8 trucks (the big trucks that you see shipping stuff around the country on our highways) declined a whopping 48 percent from a year ago.
6. Rail traffic is also slowing down substantially. In Colorado, there are hundreds of train engines that are just sitting on the tracks with nothing to do.
7. Corporate profit margins peaked during the third quarter of 2014 and have been declining steadily since then. This usually happens when we are heading into a recession.
8. A series of extremely disappointing corporate quarterly reports is sending stock after stock plummeting. Here is a summary from Zero Hedge of a few examples that we have just witnessed…
- SHARES OF LIONS GATE ENTERTAINMENT FALL 5 PCT IN EXTENDED TRADE AFTER QUARTERLY RESULTS – RTRS
- TABLEAU SOFTWARE SHARES TUMBLE 40 PCT IN AFTER HOURS TRADING – RTRS
- YRC WORLDWIDE SHARES DOWN 16.4 PCT AFTER THE BALL FOLLOWING RESULTS – RTRS
- SPLUNK INC SHARES DOWN 7.6 PCT IN AFTER HOURS TRADING – RTRS
- LINKEDIN SHARES EXTEND DECLINE, DOWN 24 PCT AFTER RESULTS, GUIDANCE – RTRS
- HANESBRANDS SHARES FURTHER ADD TO LOSSES IN EXTENDED TRADE, LAST DOWN 14.9 PCT – RTRS
- OUTERWALL SHARES FALL 11 PCT IN EXTENDED TRADING AFTER QUARTERLY RESULTS – RTRS
- GENWORTH SHARES DOWN 16.5 PCT AFTER THE BELL FOLLOWING RESULTS, RESTRUCTURING PLAN
9. Junk bonds continue to crash on Wall Street. On Monday, JNK was down to32.60 and HYG was down to 77.99.
10. On Thursday, a major British news source publicly named five large European banks that are considered to be in very serious danger…
Deutsche Bank, Credit Suisse, Santander, Barclays and RBS are among the stocks that are falling sharply sending shockwaves through the financial world, according to former hedge fund manager and ex Goldman Sachs employee Raoul Pal.
11. Deutsche Bank is the biggest bank in Germany and it has more exposure to derivatives than any other bank in the world. Unfortunately, Deutsche Bank credit default swaps are now telling us that there is deep turmoil at the bank and that a complete implosion may be imminent.
12. Last week, we learned that Deutsche Bank had lost a staggering 6.8 billioneuros in 2015. If you will recall, I warned about massive problems at Deutsche Bank all the way back in September. The most important bank in Germany is exceedingly troubled, and it could end up being for the EU what Lehman Brothers was for the United States.
13. Credit Suisse just announced that it will be eliminating 4,000 jobs.
14. Royal Dutch Shell has announced that it is going to be eliminating 10,000 jobs.
15. Caterpillar has announced that it will be closing 5 plants and getting rid of 670 workers.
16. Yahoo has announced that it is going to be getting rid of 15 percent of its total workforce.
17. Johnson & Johnson has announced that it is slashing its workforce by 3,000 jobs.
18. Sprint just laid off 8 percent of its workforce and GoPro is letting go 7 percent of its workers.
19. All over America, retail stores are shutting down at a staggering pace. The following list comes from one of my previous articles…
-Wal-Mart is closing 269 stores, including 154 inside the United States.
-K-Mart is closing down more than two dozen stores over the next several months.
-J.C. Penney will be permanently shutting down 47 more stores after closing a total of 40 stores in 2015.
-Macy’s has decided that it needs to shutter 36 stores and lay offapproximately 2,500 employees.
-The Gap is in the process of closing 175 stores in North America.
-Aeropostale is in the process of closing 84 stores all across America.
-Finish Line has announced that 150 stores will be shutting down over the next few years.
-Sears has shut down about 600 stores over the past year or so, but sales at the stores that remain open continue to fall precipitously.
20. According to the New York Times, the Chinese economy is facing a mountain of bad loans that “could exceed $5 trillion“.
21. Japan has implemented a negative interest rate program in a desperate attempt to try to get banks to make more loans.
22. The global economy desperately needs the price of oil to go back up, but Morgan Stanley says that we will not see $80 oil again until 2018.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)