Tag Archives: radical ideologue

Something to think on

Posted on by

In last nights debate HRC brought up the fact that Mr. Trump began his business with a loan from his father. She claims it was $14 million he says it was $1 million. The amount does not matter, though I believe him over her. Look at what he has done with a $1 million dollar loan, he has turned a $1 million dollar loan into a multi-billion dollar enterprise. That is one hell of a return on $1 million.

Think on this, the politicians in D.C. have no such record. They have squandered the trillions of dollars they have taken from the tax-paying citizens, and somehow managed to borrow and spend another $20 trillion. If Donald J. Trump could turn a borrowed $1 million into billions imagine what he could have done with $20 trillion.

Speaking of taxes and the tax-paying public, HRC brought up the fact that Mr. Trump has paid nothing in income taxes. She and others claim that Mr. Trump uses the tax codes to avoid paying taxes. Mr. Trump is only using the tax codes to his advantage. It is very doubtful that Mr. Trump wrote any of the tax codes, those were written by politicians. It was the politicians who provided the tools for Mr. Trump to avoid paying taxes, I might point out that Mr. Trump is not the only one using the tax codes to his advantage. Name me one instance during HRC’s time in the Senate that she sought to change the tax codes.

That brings me to this. I get pretty tired of the politicians, democrat and republican claiming that the rich do not pay their fair share. Yet none of them has ever said or put in writing how much would be a “fair share”. Name me one politician who has introduced legislation that would change the tax code, or introduced legislation that would require the rich to pay their fair share. Politicians go out of their way to protect the wealthy, large corporations, investment banks and basically anyone or anything that has money. Why, you ask? Political contributions.

Speaking of political contributions. The way to clean-up politics and get the corruption out of government is to take out the money. There was an old saying that went something like, Money is the root of all evil. Money is not the problem, it is an inanimate object, no emotion and no will of its own. Money does have the power to corrupt, so does the lack of money. Mankind is the corruptible one in this equation. Two of the things that can corrupt mankind are money and power. All men are not corrupted by money and/or power, that seems to be not the case in most politicians.

Take the money out of politics and you will take the politicians out of politics. Two things that should never make a person rich are politics and welfare, they are also the same two things that should be a career. Money in politics have turned public service into self-service.

Corruption in voting. It seems, to me, that voter ID laws should be the law of the land. This one simple act would be the surest way to verify the voter’s identity, and that he or she was entitled to vote and were indeed who they claimed to be. The democrats seem to think that requiring a photo ID places an undue financial hardship on the poorest, weakest and most vulnerable in the population. But, the poorest, weakest and most vulnerable must produce a photo ID to purchase beer, wine, alcohol and cigarettes. Think on this, how many times one must prove their identity during the course of the day?

One last thing, Ethics. It seems odd to me that we keep sending politicians to Washington, D.C. that seem to be short on ethics. There could be no other explanation, if they have an “ethics committee”. Imagine a committee to tell a person when they are acting in an unethical manner or doing an unethical act. Here is the kicker, the ethics committee is made up of other politicians. Sounds like trusting the fox to watch over the hens. Is there an ethics committee in your home or do you just know right from wrong? Ethics can best be summed up with this, Ethics are doing the right thing even when no body is watching.

Paying Tribute

Posted on by

Tribute. noun 1 a: a payment by one ruler or nation to another in acknowledgement of submission or as the price for protection.
Tributary. noun 1: a ruler or state that pays tribute to conqueror.
Tributary. adjective 1: paying tribute to another to acknowledge submission, to obtain protection, or to purchase peace.

The above definitions come from Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary Eleventh Edition, and yes I did “cherry-pick” them for use in this post. I intend to continue using this same dictionary as well as a history1800s.about.com article written by Robert McNamara and my own knowledge.

The payment of $1.7 Billion to Iran by BHO and his administration in my opinion amounted to paying a Tribute to Iran. I base my opinion on the following:
The Nuclear Deal with Iran was passed off as a way to prevent a future war. Did anybody ever explain exactly what war this deal was to prevent? Was Iran threatening to go to war with the U.S. or any other nation over the sanctions imposed on Iran? Was Iran threatening to go to war if they were not permitted to become a nuclear nation? Was the payment of the $1.7 Billion included in the deal?

Let us also not forget about the $400 million paid to Iran in cash for the release of 4 hostages. The State Department said it was not a ransom payment they called it leverage. The only way I could see it as a leverage was to with-hold the ransom payment until certain conditions were met. Such as the two planes leaving the ground simultaneously, one carrying the cash(ransom)and the other carrying the hostages.

On a side note. We must not forget that the sanctions imposed on Iran were a direct result of Iran’s actions. Had the Iranians not swarmed the U.S. Embassy in Teheran and taken Americans as hostages the sanctions would have never been imposed.

So let’s go through each definition. Before we do let me clarify something. Iran is a predominately Muslim country following Islam, the Iranians are Persians.
If I use Tribute as a noun, it asks these questions.
If the tribute paid to Iran by BHO was to acknowledge submission, what was it that BHO submitted to? BHO is the head of our government and by default represents America. Did BHO take it upon himself to voluntarily submit to Islam? If he did submit to Islam did he take America with him?
If the tribute paid to Iran was for protection, just who or what is to be protected? Who or what is Iran supposed to Protect?
If I use Tributary as a noun, it asks these questions.
If the tribute was paid to Iran as conqueror, who or what was conquered? Was America conquered by Islam? Or was it a payment for future Islamic conquests?
If I use Tributary as an adjective, it asks these questions.
If the tributary paid the tribute to acknowledge submission, who submitted to what?
If the tributary paid the tribute to obtain protection, who or what was the protection intended for?
If the tributary paid the tribute to purchase peace, who was the peace purchased for and for how long?

All of these questions open up endless speculation. Do they not? Some of the answers one could come up with are down right scary.

Paying Tribute to Muslim nations, the followers of Islam is nothing new.

The following comes from an article written by Robert McNamara at history1800s.about.com

The Young U.S. Navy Battled North African Pirates
Barbary Pirates Demanded Tribute, Thomas Jefferson Chose to Fight

I will not use the article in its entirety, I will use only parts of it and at times interject thoughts and opinions of my own. If you have not read the article in its entirety please do so, it is very interesting and educational.

The Barbary Pirates had been marauding off the coast of Africa for centuries. The North African pirates had been a menace for so long that by the late 1700s most nations paid tribute to ensure merchant shipping could proceed without being violently attacked.

In the early years of the 19th century the U.S. at the direction of President Thomas Jefferson decided to halt the payment of tribute. A war between the small and scrappy American Navy and the Barbary pirates ensued.

Background of the Barbary Pirates
The Barbary pirates operated off the coast of North Africa as far back as the Crusades. According to legend, the Barbary pirates sailed as far as Iceland, attacking ports, seizing captives as slaves and plundering merchant ships.
As most seafaring nations found it easier and cheaper, to bribe the pirates rather than fight them in a war a tradition developed of paying tribute for passage through the Mediterranean. European nations often worked out treaties with the Barbary Pirates.

So you see there is a long history of paying tribute to Muslim pirates and nations. There is another interesting tidbit from the article by Mr. McNamara.

In March of 1786 two Ambassadors, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with the ambassador from Tripoli in London. They asked him why American Merchant ships were being attacked without provocation. The ambassador explained that Muslim pirates considered Americans to be infidels and they believed they simply had the right to plunder American ships.

That answer was simply priceless wasn’t it? The Muslims have not changed one bit. They simply believe that they have the right to plunder those they consider to be infidels. There is even more from the article.

The U.S. government adopted a policy of essentially paying bribes, or tribute, to the pirates. Jefferson objected to the policy of paying tribute. Having been involved in negotiations to free Americans held by North African pirates, he believed paying tribute only invited more problems.

A man like Jefferson in the government of today would be like a breath of fresh air. He recognized the Muslims for what they were and was not afraid to say so. But wait there is still more.

While the tribute was being paid the young U.S. Navy was preparing to deal with the pirate problem by building a few ships destined to fight the pirates off Africa. 1801-1805: The First Barbary War.
When Thomas Jefferson became president he refused to pay any more tribute to the Barbary pirates. In response the pasha of Tripoli declared war on the United States. Congress never issued an official declaration of war in response, but Jefferson dispatched a naval squadron to the coast of North Africa to deal with the pirates. The show of force by the U.S. Navy quickly calmed the situation.

There was a problem with the way the war ended, it ended with a Treaty. It is the same problem that has plagued the U.S. for years. Congress did not declare war against the pirates and their sponsors(more on this later). Since war was not declared it was not fought with the objective of demanding and unconditional surrender from the pirates or their sponsors.

More from the article. After the victory at Tripoli, a treaty was arranged which, while not entirely satisfactory to the U.S., effectively ended the First Barbary War. There was delay in the ratification of the treaty by the Senate. Ransom had to be paid to free some American prisoners. The treaty was eventually signed and Jefferson reported to Congress that the Barbary States would now respect American commerce.

This brings up two points I made earlier. The treaty to end the first Barbary War was not entirely satisfactory to the U.S., then why the hell was it agreed to much less ratified? The same as the nuclear Deal with Iran, by all reports it was not entirely satisfactory for the U.S., why the hell was it agreed to then carried out? And Make no mistake the deal with Iran is a Treaty. The Secretary of State and others in the administration have already said that some of the money would likely be used to promote terrorism. A nation promoting terrorism is certainly not in the best interests of America, is it? Giving them the money to do it with is insane. The other point is, If the U.S. was victorious then why the hell did a ransom still have to be paid for the freedom of American prisoners? Wasn’t the First Barbary War fought because Jefferson refused to continue paying tribute? Did the vanquished get to dictate terms to the victor? An undeclared war that ends with a treaty is unfinished business. If there was a First Barbary War, guess what followed shortly after? You guessed it.

More from the article. 1815: The Second Barbary War. During the War of 1812 between The U.S. and Britain. The Royal Navy had effectively kept the American merchant ships out of the Mediterranean. Problems arose again with the Barbary pirates at the war’s end in 1815. Feeling that the Americans had been seriously weakened, a leader with the title of the Dey of Algiers declared war on the U.S. the U.S. navy responded with a fleet of ten ships. By July 1815 the Dey of Algiers was forced to commit to a treaty. Pirate attacks on American ships were effectively ended at that point.

You will notice that the First Barbary War ended with an “arranged” treaty and the Second Barbary War ended when the vanquished was forced to sign a treaty. But still a treaty is a treaty no matter if is arranged or forced. The first treaty lasted for 10 years. The second treaty lasted until 2009 when the Somali pirates emerged. They all have one thing in common, the pirating ended with a response from the U.S. Navy along with the Marines. The other thing then as now the Muslims would prefer to attack merchant shipping(they are unarmed vessels), they have yet to try an attack on an Armed vessel. I am referring only to pirates attacking ships on the high seas. I was not referring to the terrorist attack on the U.S.S. Cole.

You will also notice that the Dey of Algiers declared was on the U.S. only because he thought the U.S. was so weakened it could not resist and would once again begin paying tribute. How typical of Muslim terrorists, picking a target because they thought their prey was in weakened state.

A few paragraphs back I mentioned the Barbary Pirates and their sponsors. Now I will address the sponsors of the Barbary pirates. Back to the article one more time: By the early 19th century the pirates were essentially sponsored by the Arab rulers of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli.

Those four listed above make up what would be known as the Barbary States. If the Barbary pirates could be looked on as terrorists, then Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli could be seen as one of the first state sponsors of terrorism.

No one can argue that Iran is one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism. People in our own government has even made that claim. There is another thing, when the negotiations for the Iranian Nuclear Deal began, just who initiated the talks? If Iran initiated the talks Iran would have been the weaker party and unable to demand concessions from the other parties. If Iran did not initiate the talks then it would have been one of the other countries involved. Perhaps it was BHO and his administration that initiated the talks. If this is the case it would indicate that the one initiated the talks was in the weaker spot and unable to make demands and seek concessions from Iran. It would be much like the Second Barbary War, the Muslim pirates declared war because they thought America was weak. I have a feeling that desperation set in somewhere along the line and it became “a deal at any cost” endeavor on the part of all the participants except Iran. I just wonder why so many countries were involved? Why were there deadlines to reach a deal? When time had expired why was a new deadline set? Did Iran demand so many concessions because they viewed the U.S. as weak? Did the BHO administration make so many concessions and demand so little because they were weak?

The Iranian Nuclear Deal intended to avoid or prevent war lets Iran build the ultimate weapon of war, a nuclear weapon. Seems kind of stupid to let someone build a nuclear weapon that has threatened war, in the name of peace.

The “peace at any price” strategy had failed when the British PM Neville Chamberlain used it against Adolph Hitler. Was it not Neville Chamberlain who uttered these now famous words; There will be peace in our time, or something to that effect. Hell he even waved the document that He and Hitler had signed. You know the one that assured peace.

Questions and Answers Part 2

Posted on by

We as citizens of America need to start asking questions, a lot of questions. Who, What, Where, Why, When and How should be applied to every decision or statement that comes from the administration and congress. It would seem that Why would be the most important. We must look for a Motive, just like the police do in crime solving. Nobody does something for nothing, there is always a reason. Gather the evidence, investigate and find the motive, pretty simple when you think about it. Means, Motive and Opportunity.

This part of the series, as did the last, has to do with the assertion made by BHO and others that Donald Trump in their opinion is unfit and woefully unprepared to be president. In the last post I left off with; How will the establishment regain control? Can the establishment regain control?

They, the political elite, actually believe that the primaries were about Trump. True enough Trump won the nomination, but the primaries were about America and the American citizens. America was the message and Trump was the messenger. Even if Trump loses to Clinton there is no guarantee that the establishment will ever regain control of the Republican party. But it is certain that if Trump wins the establishment will never regain control of the party. The only way the establishment can regain control, in their mind and thought process, is for Trump to lose. The party elite and their donors as well as their surrogates in the media worked tirelessly throughout the primaries, at the convention and still work today to rid themselves of Mr. Trump.

Make no mistake they want the party back under their control. Will or can the party elite regain control of the party is not the important question. The real question, the important question, is how far are they willing to go to regain control? There is another thing to consider, regaining control does not guarantee the you will retain control. If you regain something that is no guarantee that you will retain control. Regaining and retaining are two entirely different things. So which is the most important? When you work out a way to retain control, you have in essence guaranteed that once control is regained it will never be lost again. This creates a new question. How far are the party elite willing to go to regain and retain control of the party. And remember that it is not only the party elite it goes all the way down to the politicians. It is all about power and control, if there is no control there can be no power. They will not stand for losing neither.

Now this is starting to get complicated and not to mention that it opens the door for some very interesting theories. One does not even have to use their imagination to figure out how far they are willing to go in their quest to regain control and then to retain that same control.

I will say this, the best and most horrific example of how far a politician will go to regain and retain control of something that had “slipped” away is what is called the “Civil War”. Abraham Lincoln declared war on the States of the Southern U.S. who had seceded. The Reconstruction period was the way to retain the Union. The “Civil War” is laid square at the feet of Abraham Lincoln. The Reconstruction period can be laid square at the feet of the politicians succeeding him. Both have been proven to be totally unnecessary. The Southern States were seen as disloyal to the Union. The “Civil War” was the instrument used to get the Southern States to return to the Union. The Reconstruction period was the instrument used to punish them for leaving the Union. More on this later.

I am not saying that the party elite are going to declare a “civil war” against those that they view as disloyal or have a reconstruction period after their victory. Some say that the civil war was waged to save America. You claim that Trump is destroying the party. I just wonder how far you are willing to go to “save” your precious party.

The next post will highlight some of the steps that you have already taken to “save” your precious party.

Questions and Answers Part 1

Posted on by

We as citizens of America need to start asking questions, a lot of questions. Who, What, Where, Why, When and How should be applied to every decision or statement that comes from the administration and congress. It would seem that Why would be the most important. We must look for a Motive, just like the police do in crime solving. Nobody does something for nothing, there is always a reason. Gather the evidence, investigate and find the motive, pretty simple when you think about it. Means, Motive and Opportunity.

Recently BHO had said of Mr. Donald Trump, that he was unfit and woefully unprepared to be president. At the same time he said something to the effect of, he would have been disappointed if McCain or Romney had defeated him. He also said he had confidence in both of them. So I asked myself why did he not say that both McCain and Romney were unfit and woefully unprepared to be president while they were running? At the beginning of the republican primaries there were 17 vying for the nomination, Mr. Trump, Dr. Carson, Mrs. Fiorina and 14 career politicians. Would BHO claim that Dr. Carson or Mrs. Fiorina would have been unfit and woefully unprepared if either one of them had been the republican nominee? We will never know the answer, but I suspect he would have. Would BHO have said that any of the career(professional)politicians were unfit and woefully unprepared to be president? We too will never know the answer, but I suspect he would NOT have. Why not? Glad you asked.

You see Gov. Bush, Sen. Cruz, Gov. Kasich, Sen. Rubio and the 10 others were and are professional(career)politicians, in the truest sense of the word, and are well-connected in the political world. Mr. Donald Trump is not a politician. According to Webster’s, politician 2 a: a person engaged in party politics as a profession 2 b: a person interested in political office for selfish or other usu. short-sighted reasons. If any of those 14 had went on to become the nominee it would have been a politician facing a politician. BHO would prefer HRC to win but if she lost, at least she would lose to another politician. What do you mean? Again, glad you asked.

When a politician wins America loses. Politicians do not have the best interests of America or Her citizens at heart. The professional(career)politicians have their own best interests at heart. They want to be re-elected and do what ever is necessary to accomplish that goal. If they lose they are satisfied that another politician wins. Even if it means or meant destroying this Republic. The career(professional)politicians do not want any outsiders in their midst. They have nothing to gain by letting the populace see what is behind the curtain. If you need proof of this look no further than the video of the statement made by the Senator from NV, minority leader Reid saying, Just give Trump a false briefing he won’t know the difference. Just make something up. They do seem to great lengths to keep us in the dark, and then brag about it. Actually encouraging the ones giving the briefing to lie to the man who could very well be our next president. Kind of makes one wonder what else they could be hiding from us, the citizens of this Republic. Why is it so important to keep the outsiders out? Glad you asked.

They have everything to lose. As long as they control, or think they control, who gets a seat at the table they have nothing to fear. As long as they control the table they control the game, not only controlling the game but making the rules as they go. They have everything to fear when they are exposed to scrutiny. They the establishment and the established politicians are all about power and control. The establishment has now realized that they are losing control, if they lose control they will lose power. To stay in power they must regain control. What they are losing control over are the voters, we made the choice this time in our nominee, the establish had no control. The establishment not only lost control of the voters but they lost control of the republican party. How will the establishment regain control? Can the establishment regain control?

Good questions. Those answers will come in Part 2.

What gets the blame the next time?

Posted on by

We have the Liberal Socialist Progressives pedaling yet another lie. Recently the Secretary of DHS gave an interview in which he stated “Gun control is Part and Parcel of Homeland Security for Public Safety”. That is one big lie, in fact the man is 180 degrees out of plumb. The Truth is that “Gun ownership and the Right of Self-Defense are Part and Parcel of Homeland Security and Public Safety”. But the lie will be repeated and accepted as truth. The victims in Orlando, San Bernardino, Ft. Hood, Chattanooga and others all had one thing in common, they were in areas where firearms were prohibited. In each instance the victims obeyed the law, the same can not be said of the Terrorists. Gun control in action.

While it is true that there is no proof that the victims could have defended themselves from the Terrorist if they were armed, there is a high probability that they could have lessened the death toll. There is also the very high probability that the Terrorist would have passed them by if he even suspected they might be armed. But we will never know if they could have or not. Why you ask? They were not given the chance to prove you right or me wrong. Why you ask? They followed the law, the one which you made that prevented them from defending themselves. They may well have failed but at least they could have tried, they never had a fighting chance. You took that from them. Now you push gun control for public safety, you have got to be kidding me. The victims were out in public at a public establishment and they were attacked. When the Terrorist attacked he used a gun or two and those that responded brought guns, many guns. Again the good guy with a gun stopped the bad guy with a gun. But they had to wait for you. The same action taken by law-enforcement could have been the same action someone in the club could have taken without the wait, if only they had the means.

As of yet America does not have exploding people, yet the government allows people into this country that are prone to explode. Nor does America have exploding cars, trucks, buses or motorcycles yet the government allows people into this country that are prone to own or operate wheeled vehicles that do Explode. Nor does America at this time have roads that explode yet the government allows people into this country that seem to enjoy exploding roads. It seems that it would just make common sense to keep people out of this country that explode, drive or ride in exploding vehicles or enjoy exploding roads. Our government does just the opposite allows them to come here and worse yet they encourage them to come here and even worse they bring them here.

When the time comes, and it will come, when people start exploding it will not be the clothing that exploded it will be the person wearing the clothes. The government will spend more time finding out who made the clothes, so they can blame the clothes and the ease in which that brand can be bought in America, rather than the exploding person. The same goes for cars, buses and trucks even the roads.

In case you missed it, there seems to be a practice in parts of the Middle-East where if a gay is found he is taken to the top of a building, dangled by his feet and then dropped to his death. In some cases they were just outright thrown off of the roof top. When this happens here in America, will you claim that the building was to tall or that the ground was too hard? When a woman gets stoned to death here in America, will you blame her for getting stoned or will you blame the rock for attacking her? What will you blame when mass beheadings occur in America? Will you blame the one being beheaded or will it be the knife? Not to mention the offenses committed against women and children, what will you blame in that instance? The list goes on and on.

You push gun control while you should push for terrorist control. Makes me wonder what it is you really want to control. The legal and lawful gun owners are under control most, definitely the vast majority, exercise self-control while others, a definite minority, are controlled by the laws. Those that exercise self-control will never be a problem, unless forced. Those that are controlled by the law will not be a problem as long as there are laws. What is out of control are the terrorists, they have no self-control and are not afraid of you or your laws much the same as the criminals. Seems to me you are taking out the frustrations of not controlling terrorists or criminals on the already law-abiding.

You push to limit and/or take away the only means that the legal and lawful citizens have to protect themselves. While you on the other hand have a small army at you disposal(a well armed small army)to keep you safe at all times. I have only me to protect and defend me and mine. By the time help arrives, it is most often to late. If you doubt that watch the news.

Seems kind of backwards to me that you provide better for them in their homelands than you will allow me to have in my homeland, and still you seek to further limit me. By the way, Which country is it that your are Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for?

I have a much better idea for you to focus your time and energy on. Why don’t you go there(where ever they are from)and teach them how to make clothing that does not tend to explode. Help them build modes of transportation that are not prone to explode. Help them build roads that are not prone to explode. And don’t forget to teach them to build kitchen appliances that are not prone to explode.

Time to wake-up

Posted on by

Wake-up sleepy heads, as they say “Wake-up and smell the coffee”. While you are at it wake-up the American spirit, the spirit that should reside inside every legal and lawful American citizen. Wake-up your values and take notice of what is going on around this country. Wake-up your morals and take notice of what is happening around this country.

Then again you may not be sleeping, you may be like the frog in the pot of water. You were not placed in a pot of hot water if you were you would have recognized the danger that you were in and you would have immediately gotten out. You were placed in a pot of water with a comfortable temperature and you remained. A fire was built under the pot you were comfortable in and the temperature was slowly increased and you never felt the danger that was awaiting you. The water is getting hotter and hotter and still you remain, never noticing the water is at, if not already past the temperature where if you were placed in it at the beginning you would have gotten out. Perhaps you have gotten comfortable while you are being stewed. Comfortable and complacent.

America finds herself in the unfortunate position of being the frog in the pot of near boiling water. The American spirit has been being boiled out of the citizens for so long the American spirit is being boiled out of America herself. There is at this point two flames in America one is growing bigger and stronger while the other is growing smaller and weaker. The flame growing is the flame under the pot with America in it. The flame growing smaller is the flame of the American spirit, Freedom and Liberty.

Now, let’s talk about “Making America Great Again” more specifically the “Greatness of America”. America truly is a great, unique and exceptional country no matter what the “apologists” claim or say. I would dare to say that there is no nation on earth like America. What was it that made America great to begin with. A little history, short version.

America was not a free and independent nation in 1776 or times prior. The 13 colonies existed under the rule of a tyrannical and despotic Monarch. A point was reached when the insufferable was no longer sufferable. America declared its independence in 1776, and then fought for it for 5 long years. It took 5 years for the British to finally get the message that the Colonials had stood all they could stand and would stand no more, but get the message they did. The beginnings of American greatness began with the Colonials they wanted freedom and liberty and were willing to take up arms and possibly sacrifice everything, even their lives to gain it. Independence was not granted to the Colonials, they fought for it and won it many died to gain it. Those brave souls earned for each and every legal and lawful citizen of this great nation Independence with all of the Freedoms and Liberties associated with it. In short America became a great nation not because of the world, but instead in spite of the world, and therefore owes no apologies to the world.

So, how did America find herself sitting in a pot of near boiling water? There are three answers to that question.
The first answer is sadly enough the citizens. The citizens found out soon enough that they could indeed vote themselves money from the national treasury(more on this in a later post).
The second answer is that the government changed. They found out soon enough that they did not need consent to govern(more on this in a later post too).
The third answer is that the Conservatives found themselves swallowed up by the Republican Party(more on this now). The Republican Party does not now or has it ever represented any Conservative values. There have been times when a Conservative have been elected President and along with him brought Conservative values, but was only allowed to implement Conservative changes to government that the Republican Party would allow. The Republican Party is the party of Big Government, always has been always will be. The Democratic Party is nothing like it was, and has deteriorated to a level of outright Socialism. The funny thing is that most Conservatives are former Democrats. President Reagan was at one time a Democrat, as he famously stated when asked why he left the Democratic Party “I did not leave the Democratic Party the Democratic Party left me”. President Reagan knew and recognized that the Democratic Party had been hi-jacked and would never return, lost forever to Radical Ideologues. There are still many Democrats in the spirit of President Thomas Jefferson and President Ronald Reagan, but none of them hold office as Democrats and sadly they do not fit in with Republicans(this will also be covered in a later post).

There is before America a chance, perhaps the last chance to get out the hot water. That chance comes in the form of Mr. Donald J. Trump, he is no Jefferson or Reagan but he is the possible way out. Look at the rest of the contenders, one is a self-proclaimed socialist and the other is, well. Sanders and Clinton will both keep America in hot water, boiling the very life and spirit out of her and us.

Many of us recognized the dangers of being a pot of water long ago and got the heck out of it. Now we find ourselves trying to pull America out of the pot. The task before us is a great one. We try to pull but America sinks deeper in the pot, slowly having the spirit cooked out of her. There are times when we make great progress then a set back occurs and America slips back in. But we keep trying, it would be a shame to let this Nation continue to boil. At any rate, if you are asleep wake the heck-up realize that America is in a heap of trouble climb out of the pot dry yourself and for God’s sake help us pull this great nation out of the proverbial pot. You do have another choice, you can remain asleep in the pot of boiling water until one day you hear someone say “Put a fork in her she is done”. Your choice.

How on earth did America reach this low point?

Posted on by

Perhaps a better question would be, How low will America sink? I’m not even talking about the presidential primaries or the conventions, though that seems to be the subject of the times. what I am talking about is America in general and the American citizens in particular.

Is it the state(condition) of America dragging down the citizens or is it the state(condition) of the citizens dragging America down? The answer to this question is that one feeds off of the other in what appears to be a never-ending cycle.

The current state(condition)of America.
If America were a person in the Emergency Room what level of care would be needed? America is by no means in a condition of being placed on Life Support, but the Vital Signs are not good and treatment is required to prevent a further deterioration in Vital Signs. Much like a person America could only end up in the Emergency Room for Illness or Injury or both. Triage would reveal the reason and course of treatment. The triage would reveal that there is both an Illness and an Injury that has caused the continued decay and decline in America. But there is a Cure.

The decline of America and the American citizens began with the birth or more aptly the creation of Generation E. The American government created the E Generation, and the created Generation E has given birth to millions who are a part of Generation E. To answer the question, What is Generation E? Generation E is the Entitlement Generation, the Generation that believes that they are Entitled to anything and everything. Not only are the good and decent citizens forced to contend with and support the Entitlement Generation, we are forced to contend with Generation O and Generation D. In case you are wondering, Generation O is the Offended(by any and everything)Generation, and Generation D is the Dependent(on government for any and everything)Generation.

In the not to distant past there was one constant that kept America safe and strong and that was the citizens. When Japan attacked at Pearl Harbor it was done so to deal a death-blow to the U.S Military and especially the U.S. Navy in the Pacific. Japan did not attack or attempt an invasion on America for one simple reason, an outright invasion of America would have come at an extremely high price and the price was unaffordable to Japan. Had Japan mounted an outright invasion of America, Japan would have faced a heavily armed population. Not only were the citizens armed but they were a hardy and hardened lot. It was famously said by one Japanese “There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass”. The Japanese were ambitious not crazy. It is my opinion that no country on earth would attack America for the very same reason.

In 1941 there were many veterans of WW 1 still among the citizenry and still relatively young and able-bodied hardened by war and further hardened by the Great Depression. Many of the population still lived in rural areas on farms and ranches. They too were hardened by the Great Depression. The people in the rural areas had to make do with what they had and make the best of it. These people had skills, farming skills, raising their own food and hunting skills(actually going into the woods and mountains and taking game)to feed their families. If things were needed that they could not afford they made up for the lack of cash by trading and bartering. They made do without government handouts. They endured the hardships and pressed on. That was then.

This is now. Look around the general public today, you will see many(to many)that are lazy and fat. You see many that will not do for themselves, they expect and even demand that the government do and provide for them. These are the same ones that do nothing to better themselves. These are the ones that feel that they are entitled to something, everything and anything even though they have never earned it. They feel Entitled and are Offended if someone insist that they provide for themselves and have become Dependent on government. They have been Conditioned to believe that the government provides Free Services(Welfare), the government does provide Welfare, but it is not Free, for the government to Give to one it must first be Taken from another. Does anyone really believe that these people know what a true hardship is? They will stand in line for hours upon hours or even camp-out in front of a store just to be the first or among the first to buy the latest electronic gadget or game or to see a movie. But they will not stand in line to do their civic duty and vote. If they do vote and have to wait in line they claim that is not fair or places an undue hardship on them and demand that the government do something. They readily show photo ID to by beer and liquor but cry foul if they must show ID to vote. The only hardship these people know is if they can not acquire the latest electronic gadget or if there reality show gets cancelled. This is the Illness.

The preceding paragraph was not written for every citizen, if it does not apply to you then you will recognize that fact. At the same time those that it does apply to will not recognize that it was written for and about them. Would anybody really expect these people to come to the defense of this country? Would they be willing to lay down their gadgets and pick up a rifle and get behind a blade of grass? I submit that they would not. They would rather submit to an enemy than Offend the same enemy.

Sadly there are not any veterans of WW1 among us now they have all since passed. However, we are fortunate to still have among us some veterans of WW 2, Korea and Viet Nam these too are hardy and hardened men and women. But sadly they are growing old and they too will pass from us in the not to distant future. Additionally we still have among us the veterans of Desert Storm, of which I am one and we too are aging and undoubtedly will also pass from existence. As will the ones who follow.

One undeniable fact is that the Entitled, Offended and Dependent Generations exist in every generation from the Depression era to the present.

Governments role in the decline of America. Where should I start?
Should I start with Tariffs? Tariffs are no more than a tax. A tax placed on goods imported that is paid wholly by the consumer. The tax is not paid by the overseas manufacturer. The tax is not paid by the exporting country. The tax is paid by the consumer in the importing nation to the government of the importing country.
Should I start with Subsidies? Subsidies are no more than corporate welfare. They are used to prop up businesses or industries that the government says provides a benefit. The only one that benefits is the business or industry. Subsidies are paid for with tax dollars. The consumer pays the subsidy(if they pay taxes)and still pays for the product. Buying one thing twice.
Should I start with the other subsidy, Welfare? Yes welfare is a subsidy. The tax payers are forced to subsidize the lifestyles of others that will not or choose not to finance their lifestyles for themselves. There are many welfare cases that are generational. A reward for bad behavior and bad decisions.
Should I start with Income Taxes? Income taxes are at this point a penalty for producing. Welfare is a reward for not producing.
Should I start with the National Debt? Nearing 20 trillion dollars in debt, money spent buying votes and friends. Please explain to me how everything that was taken in was spent or wasted and why you had to borrow an additional 20 trillion dollars to continue spending or wasting.
The list goes on and on. This is the Injury.

Taxes at the outset were intended for the Welfare(Well-Being)of the Nation. They were intended to fund the needful functions of Government, they were not intended to subsidize the less fortunate and especially not the lazy and slothful. There was warning from long-ago that went something like this; The Republic is in danger of failure when the populace discovers they can and then begin voting themselves money from the national treasury. They discovered it, they do it and the Republic is in great peril.

If you need proof that America is in decline you need to look no further that this. Some men that claim to feel like a woman demand to use facilities for women. The state says no, men use men’s rooms and women use women’s rooms. Then some federal government knucklehead says that might be discrimination based on sex. Some men feel Entitled to use women’s rooms based on how they feel and are Offended that they can’t and are Dependent on government to force the women to comply and allow men in the women’s rooms. College students that seek counseling because they were traumatized by someone writing in chalk “Trump” on a sidewalk.

There is another aspect to “Making America Great Again”, other than bringing back jobs and money from overseas, though that would be nice. What is needed to make America great again is for the American citizens to make themselves great again. The citizens need a revival of the American Spirit. American citizens need to become hardy and hardened. American citizens need to return to the practice of Self-Reliance and become Self-Dependent. Rely and Depend on ones own self. Stop being lazy and slothful. Learn to live with-in one’s own means. Learn to make do. Become the one behind the blade of grass. This is the cure so to speak.

America is great, always has been, always will be. The government and some of the citizens are dragging her down. Every time I hear a political clown claiming that he or she will shrink the “size and scope” of government I just bust out laughing. No politician has any intention of shrinking the federal government, I especially get a kick out of one claiming to abolish the IRS. Just how does one abolish a federal government agency? No politician will shrink the federal government in size or scope. If the federal government were to be shrunk, that would in theory return power to either the state or to the people. Do you really think the federal government would empower the states much less the people? Government at all levels is about power and control. What we the people should be concerned with is, when will the government gain absolute power and total control? If and when government gains absolute power and total control over the people it will be because the citizens allowed it to happen.

All of the Kings, Tyrants and Dictators of the world have always feared one thing and one thing only, and that is a nation of Free People. America was founded as a Free Nation(at that time Free and Independent States)inhabited by a Free People Governed by Consent. It is my opinion, If the nation continues down the current path the nation will no longer be a Free Nation inhabited by a Free People governed by Consent, it will become a Nation Ruled by Force with no free inhabitants.

So I now ask what is it that keeps our enemies from our shores? I can assure you that it is not the Entitled, Offended or Dependent Generations. The answer simply put is that there are still enough Hardy and Hardened Americans to make the cost to high to bear. The downside to this is that time and laziness has taken a terrible toll on the Hardy and Hardened.

To answer the Question, How low will America sink? To the very bottom if the people do not wake up and start acting like the Americans and if the government does not start governing as the Founding Fathers envisioned. Both must happen. So which are you ? Part of the Illness? Part of the Injury? Are you willing to be part of the Cure.

The problem with establishment politicians

Posted on by

This goes for politicians at all levels federal, state and local they just plain do not get it. What they just do not get is the fact that the citizens are getting fed up with their greed, corruption and partisan politics.

This is especially true for the GOP. The republican party has disappointed the voters constantly. Making then breaking promises to the voters. It seems that many conservatives in name only say what the voters want to hear then do what ever they or the establishment want as soon as they take office. Well GOP, like it or not the voters are fed up with you, your lies and your politics as usual. I should not be taking such “liberties” with my interpretation with what is happening in the GOP primary process, so from this moment on I will stick with my opinion and stop trying to interpret the action of others.

You will notice above that I called them Conservative In Name Only(CINO) and not Republican In Name Only(RINO), that is because they do not understand the principles of Conservatism. If one does not know or understand the principles of conservatism, how can one claim to be a conservative? As a reminder to the ones who claim the mantle of being a conservative, these are some of the principles of Conservatism; 1: Lower Taxes 2: A Limited Government 3: A Strong National Defense 4: Individual Financial Responsibility. If you can not live up to at least these four principles (these are the easy ones)of conservatism then please stop calling yourself a Conservative.

What the establishment GOP does understand is the principle of big government, which is understandable because the Republican party, yes the party of Lincoln was founded in and on the principles of a big centralized government. The federal government has been growing in size and scope since Lincoln was elected and will continue even after this election.

Another problem with establishment politicians is that they engage in partisan politics. The word partisan takes on a whole new meaning with used in conjunction with politics. The political partisans are nothing like the partisans of WW 2. When someone engages in partisan politics, this is the result, A firm adherent to a party, faction, cause or person; especially one exhibiting blind, prejudiced and unreasoning allegiance. When a politician engages in partisan politics he/she is only concerned with what is best for the party or the person who best represents the best interests of the party, the party supporters(donors) or special interest groups(lobbyists). Little if any concern is given for what is best for the nation as a whole. The motto of the establishment is “Party First, Foremost and Always”.

The federal government will continue to grow until conservatism and the principles of conservatism come back to America as a way of life. The time has come when the GOP establishment must and will take a back-seat to the voters. There must be a reason the two GOP candidates who do not represent the establishment are winning and leading in the delegate count must be doing so for a reason.

Now on to matter that is near and dear to my heart, the Florida primaries are coming up. You can bet your bottom dollar that an establishment candidate will not get my vote. Not only is the primary coming up, we in Marion County have another issue on the ballot. We are expected to vote yes or no to increased sales tax to fund roads and public safety. A voluntary tax of 1% for four long years. The Marion County Commission has somehow managed to get that on the ballot, typical politicians. There are a present signs going up around Marion County, that read “Road Project Ahead Pending Sales Tax Approval”, these politicians must be kidding. The ones that I have seen are located north of the intersections of CR 25A and CR 329 just before the Lowell Post Office and north of the intersection of CR 315 and CR 316 just before the Ft. McCoy Post Office and I am sure there are more. Making and putting up these signs must have cost money, money that could have been put to better use, maybe road maintenance, but no it was wasted making stupid signs. These signs in my opinion are to put a “guilt trip” on the voters. Go out and see for yourselves, shining examples of waste, fraud and abuse at the county level. This ballot initiative will get a big fat NO from me. If you can waste tax money-making signs, what else have you wasted money on? You waste money and you want me to give you more, “fat chance”. Not only do you want the voters to voluntarily pay more taxes, you will raise the millage rates on property taxes. You want the people to give more and then you will take more. I guess the Marion County Commission calls that a “little give and take”.

Some of my Conservative brothers and sisters are calling for more like Ronald Reagan, I personally am calling for more like Thomas Jefferson. Short of a Jefferson or a Reagan I will settle for a Trump or a Cruz.

Forward to the Past

Posted on by

Freedom and Liberty are but one generation away from being extinguished is certainly a true statement, sort of. The further this nation gets from the days of its founding the less some of the population, and the numbers keep growing, understand the reasons why America why America wanted to be and became a free nation. The reasons the Colonials wanted to be free were basically pretty simple. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, yep just that simple. The Colonials had suffered(lived)under the rule of tyrants and despots as long as that life was sufferable. When the insults, usurpations, despotism and tyranny reached a point where they were no longer sufferable those brave men and women rose up against tyranny and threw off that form of government and instituted a new form of government. The intended form of government was one in which governed by consent of the governed, it was not one in which they would be ruled. When one is ruled there is no need for consent. If the colonials had only sought to continue to live under tyrannical and despotic rule the would have been no need for the American Revolutionary War. No, they did not intend to replace tyranny with tyranny, they instead sought to live a life with individual freedoms and liberties, willing to live and be governed, but not willing to live under rule by force.

It is not just this or the next generation that places this Republic in danger, sadly previous generations play a major part in placing this Republic in great peril. Many in America, people of all ages and dispositions have become completely dependent on government. These are the people who only slightly mumble in complaint against government overreach. They expect that the government provide for their lives from cradle to grave. What they do not grasp is the fact that if the government gives the government can take away. They also do not grasp the fact that for the government to “give” them something it must first be “taken” from another.

Another true statement is, Freedom and Liberty are but one election away from being extinguished. It is saddening and somewhat frightful that the voters of America are even considering voting for some of the candidates who are seeking the office of the President of the United States of America.
Lets face it when a self-proclaimed Socialist is running in the primaries and doing very well there is something wrong. The talking heads and pundits on TV, radio and print seem to think that this is because the voters only support a socialist because they do not understand what socialism is or just do not care. While I do believe that they do not care they do know what socialism is. Basically it boils down to this, whether it is socialism, communism or fascism the government takes care of everything and that is what they want. The supporters of socialism want the government to take care of everything and thus they are free from personal responsibility. The residents of nations under socialist, communist or fascist rule live a life where the government provides for their lives from cradle to grave.

There is an old saying from the past that sums it up best, and it goes something like this; The Republic is finished when the voters realize that they can vote themselves money from the national treasury. So with that, I ask you this, which is the lowest of the low, the one that would vote him or herself money from the treasury for personal gain or the one that would provide an avenue for a person to vote themselves money from the treasury? There would be no mechanism for a person to vote for themselves money from the treasury unless a corrupt politician provided that avenue. That shows that the politician is the lowest of the low, but the person that votes money from the treasury for his or her own gain is pretty damned low, also.
It seems that some of the voters of today, of varying ages and dispositions have given up on the ideas of self-determination and self-reliance and seem content to be cared for by government. It is quite possible that this election could be the one that ends the Republic as we know it. It also seems that some voters are voting to move forward into the past taking what was left to us and giving it back to tyranny and despotism.

It does not matter if the Tyrant is a Republican, a Democrat or an Independent a tyrant is a tyrant. If the democratic party is willing to accept a Socialist who carries the letter (I) behind his name, to run on the democratic ticket the Democratic Party has become the Democratic Socialist Party. The GOP is not much better than the Socialist Democrats, at least not in the aspect of pushing forward with the “big government” agenda. I get tired of hearing Republicans calling themselves Conservatives. I also get so tired of hearing the Republican Party being the “party of Lincoln and of Reagan”. Lincoln was a big government republican, he came from the Whig party. Do not confuse the Whig Party with the Whigs of the Colonial and Revolutionary War times. Maybe the GOP really are “big government” Republicans and not Conservatives. They would stop being RINO(republican in name only) and become known as CINO(conservatives in name only). Government is about power and growing government and acquiring even more power.

Yet another true statement is, Freedom and Liberty could be extinguished by one more stupid vote or action by the congress critters, the courts and/or the current administration. This is perhaps the most damning of all, the Legislative branch is supposed to write legislation and send it to the President for signature of approval or veto. Congress does not read the legislation they pass, remember these words “You have to pass it to find out what is in it”. The president is not supposed to legislate by executive order. The courts are supposed to interpret law not make law, abortion and same-sex marriage come to mind. If a law is unconstitutional then by all means strike it down, do not strike it down and then just up and make law. The idea was to have three separate branches of government, each with its own specific role in government, a system of checks and balances.

Some of the candidates on the GOP side are saying what needs to be said, while others are saying what we want to hear. As for abolishing the IRS, just how is that possible? What about the 16th Amendment? Do you just plan to abolish the 16th Amendment by executive order? As for simplifying the tax code that takes legislation. Does anybody really believe that the government will in any shape, manner or fashion give up that power? We on the right, the Conservatives, the true Conservatives have been promised so much by Republican Party politicians only to be disappointed, sold down the river so to speak. Promises made but never kept and in some cases no attempt was even or ever made to act in a manner to fulfill the promises.

On the Democratic Socialist side all of the candidates are promising to give away “free” stuff. As pointed out above the only way for the government to give away anything it must first be taken away from another. Ask one of the Democratic Socialists, what happens when all of the wealth has been redistributed and everybody is equally poor what happens next? As for taxes how much is a fair share? To tax the wealthy at a level you say is their fair share you have to modify the tax code. That takes legislation, are you planning to tax by executive order? How many poor people have ever given another a job.

This election is about more than electing a President and some Senators there is the possibility that three or four Supreme Court Justices will be replaced. Think about that, it is especially important since the Supreme Court has taken up deciding rights and making law. The President will nominate Justices and the Senate will hold confirmation hearings. Do you really want a Democratic Socialist naming a person to a lifetime appointment?

Fail to learn the lessons of history and history repeats itself. Do not vote America back in time, politically. I was not there, but I read somewhere that the times before 1775 really sucked.

What would be the Price, Cost, Value and Worth?

Posted on by

The question in the title of this post is in reference to the God-given and Constitutional rights each American is free to enjoy and exercise or not as they see fit. Another series of questions that goes along with this post is the following; Could a person be convinced to sell their God-given and Constitutional rights? Could a person be convinced to trade or exchange their God-given and Constitutional rights?

There has been much of late on the internet about a possible gun grab by the federal government. It is my, as well as others, belief that a gun-grab by the federal government would have dire consequences. Of all I have read regarding the gun-grab and the plans to do so whether by executive order or by legislative means I have neither seen or heard about the following possibility.

Could it be possible to tie the free exercise of the Second Amendment to money, money from the federal government. No, I am not talking about a gun buy back plan or program. What I am talking about is tying gun ownership to receiving government monies. Think about this for a moment. How many households across America receive checks, federal government checks, every month retirement pensions, social security, disability checks or welfare, food stamps, wic and the rest of the long list of what are now called “government entitlements”.

I do not think that the federal government would or could implement and carry out a gun grab. But the federal government could tie gun ownership to government payments. The federal government would not be necessarily infringing on the right to keep and bear arms per se. Gun ownership or the lack of gun ownership could just be a pre-condition to receiving federal checks or federal benefits. It could be as simple as if a person was not willing to give up the right to keep and bear arms he or she would be ineligible for government money of any type. If a person wanted to continue receiving federal government he or she would only need to “voluntarily” give-up the right to keep and bear arms. In this instance the federal government did not deny the person their right to keep and bear arms, the right was exchanged for money, sold so to speak.

Think about this for a moment, the “experts” estimate that 47% of the households in America are on at least one form of government assistance. Could these households go a month without the checks that they rely upon for their very existence? Probably not. Add to this the numbers of retirees from the military and the federal government, they also receive pension checks from guess who? Don’t forget about the number of persons on social security old age or disability, that check also comes from guess who? Also don’t forget about the number of persons getting VA benefits, again a government check. Most of America could and would be disarmed with this simple maneuver, tying gun ownership to money. The government would not be grabbing your gun you would be giving it up freely.

Voluntarily disarming could also be a pre-condition to being hired by the federal government. Simple you want a government job, disarm. Gun=No government job. The only gun you could carry would be a government issued gun and then only if the position required it, and only as long as the tour of duty.

This would be only the beginning, not only would you “voluntarily” give up your right to keep and bear arms, you would also most likely be placed on a prohibited person list. You would be prohibited from purchasing a firearm the same as a common criminal, though you committed no crime. You could not buy guns or ammunition. There would most likely be a form that you would be required to sign explaining all of this to you.

Hold on it gets worse. Now that the right to keep and bear arms has been freely exchanged for a continuation of government checks, and the person placed on the prohibited persons list, there now must be a system to ensure compliance. To ensure the person is in full compliance with the “exchange program” there must be a system of checks and balances, so to speak. The government would be authorized to conduct unannounced and warrantless searches for guns and ammunition. The way the system is now if a search warrant is issued for a 65 inch flat screen TV, no area can be legally searched where a 65 inch flat screen TV could not be hidden. There would be no excluded areas for search if they were searching for a single bullet.

If one is found with a prohibited item I am sure there would be confiscation, fines and a loss of benefits along with a lengthy prison term. No telling what could or would be found looking for a single bullet. So in fact you sold your Second Amendment right, and lost your Fourth Amendment protection. They get a two for one deal. The question is this; How much will you sell your rights for, and what others would you lose?

Oh, and keep this in mind, even a draconian measure like this would not effect a single criminal.