|
|
Over the last couple of election cycles, we have learned that polling results are manipulated to attempt to create a political outcome as opposed to predict a political outcome. This is not just happening in the United States but seems to be worldwide where polling is common. I have followed the polling results of different international elections and have seen the same results. Recent examples would be the elections in the United Kingdom for both the Scottish Independence vote and the more recent Brexit vote.
We have seen the same thing occurring in the United States, not just for the presidential election of 2016, but also for elections prior. Listening to those who do polling and those who are critics of pollsters, we who are political junkies can seem to come to a few conclusions: It is the intent of the pollsters to mislead for political purposes. Polling has become much more difficult with the wide spread use of cell phones and many people not answering calls from numbers they do not recognize. The public intentionally deceives the pollsters. This political junkie has become even more confused this year. I thought I had become somewhat adept at interrupting the polls based on who was doing the polling. The swings this year and discrepancies between different polls have become virtually impossible to interpret. I have seen reported swings by as much as ten points with in less than a 10-day period. If these huge swings were isolated situations, perhaps they would make sense, but the are becoming more and more common. Being a political junkie, I have tried to gauge my understandings on those polls who have shown some constituencies and have found only one consistent gauge. With that particular gauge I have learned that it is consistently wrong, and the more definite it becomes the greater the likelihood that exactly the opposite will happen. Based on that gauge, it would appear that the blue tsunami became a blue wave and is now a blue undertow and the blue tsunami has created a red wave. I will tell you the late evening of November 6 or the early morning of November 7 if the predictions of Comrade Pelosi are once again consistent. Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Pelosi said that she’s more confident about the midterms for Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) than ever before and said that “we will win.” Asked how she could be so sure, the California Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) said, “We’re just walking precincts and if everyone votes, we’ll have even a bigger victory. But Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) will carry the House. If we have a bigger victory, the Senate, governorship's, it’s going to be a great night for America.” Don’t forget that a couple of weeks ago Pelosi told fellow Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to follow their golden rule and tell the American people whatever you had to tell them to win. Deceit and lies are great if it brings victory. After all, never forget that the “ends justify the means.” This is what Pelosi said about the 2016 races: Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Pelosi said she is becoming increasingly optimistic that the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party might take back the House of Representatives in November. They’ll need to flip 30 seats controlled by the Republicans to do so. “I thought in December I would’ve told you we’d win 20 seats, left to our own devices,” Pelosi said in an interview. “(But) seeing the behavior of the [GOP] presidential candidates right after that when the debates [happened], I became even more optimistic because they were so pathetic. … Since then, I think anything is possible.” Most observers think Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are unlikely to flip the House. But Pelosi suggested a Hillary Clinton landslide might carry House Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to power with her. “If Hillary were to win 54-46, oh my God. It’s all over. If it's 53-47, and I think that’s in the realm of possibility ... that’s a big deal,” Pelosi said. “Five or more [percentage points] is a big deal.” Pelosi’s projections might sound optimistic, but they’re not that far outside the mainstream. Geoffrey Skelley, a political analyst at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, offered a similar theory. Thank you, Pelosi. Let us hope you remain a blind prophet so American can continue its march back to freedom and prosperity.
0 Comments
The answer to that question is apparently no. In my quest to understand what is happening throughout the world, I find it is becoming more and more difficult. In the United States we get virtually no world news. I have this reinforced as a reality when I travel outside the United States. There have been two very important elections held recently outside the United States and very few Americans have any idea they even took place. An election in Germany was not favorable for Angela Merkel and she has resigned as head of her party and will not run to be head of Germany at the end of her term. This is critical because now even Germany is saying enough with the forced illegal immigration. This election could be as big a blow to the European Union as it is was to Angel Meriel.
There was also an election held in Brazil. The conservative candidate, Jair Bolsonaro, won overwhelmingly. Brazil is the largest economy and country in South America. The conservative candidate emulates Donald Trump and is not embarrassed, but proud to say so. This election could be extremely important for Brazil and South America as it could and likely will revitalize the Brazilian economy which will have a major impact for other South American countries. The press referred and continues to refer to Jair Bolsonaro as a far-right candidate. Interestingly he is of the same mold as many of the newly elected officials in Europe and North America. The left would like us to believe that all conservatives are far-right. Meanwhile, in the United States, our current news is dominated by the left making outlandish statements such as GQ Writer Julia Ioffe saying that “Trump Has Radicalized Many More People Than ISIS.” This clearly shows the ignorance of so many members of the media and the left today. Those on the right continue to report as news the double standards of the left. Constantly, I hear the complaint that the left has double standards, and it is called news, that the left has shown another double standard such as they claim they are concerned about the children in the caravan but support the murder of millions of babies in the United States, even calling for tax payer dollars to help in this mass murder of American babies. Yes, this is clearly a double standard, but is it earthshattering or breaking news? No, it is neither. I have been accused by people on the left for pointing out the fact that the Democrat Party has become the Marxist/Progressive Party. Of course, I make no apologies for this because it is clearly the truth. I also make no apologies for making the factual statement that the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) despise the principles upon which our nation was founded and abhor The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of the United States, and The Bill of Rights. It is the goal of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to obliterate those documents. It is also a fact that this movement within the Democrat Party did not start with Comrade Obama and his Marxist infested Regime. This movement began when Comrade Lenin made it his goal to infiltrate the United States through the Communist International by attacking the educations system, the media, and the entertainment industries in the United States. He had a willing accomplice in Woodrow Wilson and Stalin had a willing and eager partner in Franklin Roosevelt. Marx had stated all long-standing principles, all morality, and all religion must be abolished in a country or society before the transformation, or as Comrade Obama called it, “a fundamental transformation” could occur. The Marxists, as shown by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Moa, Castro, Chavez, and Obama are people with two principles by which they operate. They have always believed in double standards or do one thing and then blame your opponent for doing the exact same thing, only reword the action to accommodate your goals. We on the right do not understand this concept. We on the right believe that all people operate on the same standard that we do. This is not the case, and so the right leaning reporters become outraged when the double standard, that is the way of the left, is employed. Understand that when we on the right establish the hypocrisy of the left to the public, it has no affect on the left. Their response is only to justify their actions by accusing their opponent of some other outlandish action such as Julia Loffe did. The reporters and supporters of the right are also taken aback when the Marxists tell lies about individuals or situations and then when those lies are exposed the members of the left defend those lies by attacking or by making even more outlandish lies. Marx said in the Marxist world there is no morality, there is no right or wrong, the only concern is, did the means move us closer to our goal, or “The ends justify the means.” Comrade Obama understood that not only was he misleading the American public but that he was telling a “bold faced lie” when he said, “You can keep your plan if you like it, you can keep your doctor if you like them.” Within the Marxist world this was just fine because it helped accomplish their goal of passing the legislation they wanted. Comrade Harry Reid knew he was telling a bold-faced lie when he said to the United States Senate and the American people that he had it from reliable sources that Mitt Romney had not paid taxes for ten years. When Reid was confronted with this lie a few years later his justification was that Romney did not win the election, but Comrade Obama did. I have studied Collectivism (Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Progressives, and Democrats) for years. I have read mostly proponents of Collectivism. I have read many different biographies on the key players of Collectivism including Marx, Engels, and Lenin. In this almost life-long search, I have discovered that what I am telling you is grounded in fact. The doctrines declared by Karl Marx in his many writings are the same policies that are enunciated by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) including that you must skillfully apply double standards and any means is justified so long as we move closer to our ends which is to transform each and every society to a Marxist totalitarian state. Please Freedom Loving Americans, learn and understand your opponent, who is in fact an enemy of freedom and all the principles upon which the United States was founded. Do not dwell on the hypocrisy of the left, it is their nature just as playing by the rules and fairness is the nature of the right, but dwell on the real news which is the results of their actions and the inevitable social and financial destruction of our country as resulted in every country or society they ruled. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rep. Ben Ray refuses to withdraw support for their antisemitic or bigoted candidates. Ilhan Omar as their candidate in Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District has claimed that Israel “hypnotized the world” and said she hoped Allah would awaken people to “the evil doings of Israel.” She recently defended those comments by referring to “the apartheid Israeli regime.” Federalist: Indiana Democrat Andre Carson has been a speaker at numerous pro-jihad conferences and terror-tied Muslims have given him generous donations. CAIR proudly lists Carson on their website, along with Keith Ellison and many other Democrats. Michigan Democrat Rashida Tlaib, who aims to the first Muslim woman in Congress, supports Rasmea Odeh, convicted of murdering two American students in a Jerusalem bomb attack. Tlaib has also supported Islamic Relief, a group linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and designated as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates. Again, Somalia-born Minnesota state representative Ilhan Omar defended nine men who sought to join ISIS, including Abdirahman Yasin Daud, sentenced to 30 years in prison by a federal judge. Omar, of the Democrat Farmer Labor Party, is now running for Congress in Minnesota’s Fifth District. Democratic nominee Scott Wallace came under criticism after it emerged that his charitable foundation has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to groups that promote the BDS campaign. Leslie Cockburn, the Democratic nominee in Virginia’s 5th Congressional District. The Virginia GOP has accused her of being a “virulent anti-Semite,” based on her-coauthorship of “Dangerous Liaison: The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israeli Covert Relationship,” a book that “advocated for the inherently anti-Semitic belief that Israel controls America’s foreign policy.” The Virginia GOP quoted from The New York Times review of the book: “Its first message is that, win or lose, smart or dumb, right or wrong, suave or boorish, Israelis are a menace. The second is that the Israeli-American connection is somewhere behind just about everything that ails us.” Netflix is running a particularity unfunny, obscene and antisemitic comedy special. “Bert Kreischer: Secret Time.” In it Kreischer screams, “F*ck, I’m killing all the Jews!” The foremost group solely focused on tracking anti-Semitism at American institutions of higher learning states that there were over 1,700 anti-Semitic incidents that have occurred in the past three years (2015-2017). One vision cannot exist with the principles upon which our nation was founded, and the other vision cannot exist without those principles. This brings about the clear divide we are now witnessing in our nation. This divide is defined by the clear distinction between individualism and collectivism. Collectivism is a term that encompasses the doctrines of Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Progressives, and the doctrines proclaimed by the Democrat party of America which is in reality the Marxist/Progressive Party.
Karl Marx is to collectivism what Adam Smith is to capitalism; that is although both existed prior to the writings of Marx and Smith, these two are credited with clearly defining the doctrines and principles of each. A study of Karl Marx reveals that the doctrines of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party is as much of an adherent to Collectivism as were Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, and Chavez. Time and space limit me in outlining all of the doctrines, but these are a few of the most prominent. I would strongly suggest you obtain the book I wrote, “The Road To Tyranny, Individualism to Collectivism” to understand how the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) vision for the United States is a vision founded in Collectivism and is doomed to failure. Marx said that a society must be destroyed so the new classless society which will be totally conforming and totally equal can be built. To accomplish this destruction, all long standing principles must be obliterated. For the United States this would be the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence, The United States Constitution, and The Bill of Rights. The Collectivist movement, which has been active in the United States since at least since the early 1900’s has been working to accomplish this goal. Collectivism cannot exist so long as the United States adheres to our long-standing principles. Freedom cannot exist if these are obliterated. The Declaration of Independence states that certain of our rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are endowed or given by our Creator or God. This puts God in the position of ultimate sovereign. The Collectivist believes that the ultimate sovereign is government and the first and only allegiance the citizen has is to government. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have said that government has the right to determine who has a right to life, not God, and so they have declared that the life of an unborn child can be taken in the name of “a women’s right to choose.” The Marxist/Progressives declare the opinion of the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade to be the law of the land. When the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) proclaim abortion as the law of the land they are denouncing the Constitution of the United States which states that only the Legislative branch can legislate. The Constitution of the United States limits the role of government and our founders understood that freedom and independence can only exist when the role of government is limited. The Marxist doctrine thrives only when government controls all facets of the life of the citizen. Marx was the first proponent of whom I am aware that called for public education of all citizens. Marx understood that with public education the state had total control over the values being taught within the state. The Collectivist understands that to bring about their totally conforming classless society, it is critical to indoctrinate the youth of a society. The Collectivist also states that all children are the province of the state and not the family. Lenin, as did future collectivists including the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), set as a primary goal the destruction of the core family. Lenin did this by legalizing and encouraging the murder of unborn children, encouraging adultery and free sex, encouraging divorce, and following the doctrine of Marx Lenin insisted the definition of morality must be changed so all behavior is considered moral. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have promoted the role of government to greatly exceed the role intended by the founders so that in today’s America government controls, not only the life of the unborn, but the education of the very young and protects behaviors that are the very soul of a morally corrupt society which greatly enhances the destruction of the core family unit. The government even punishes mothers and fathers who try to instill their values in their children when those values contradict the dictates of the state. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution for the purpose of reinforcing in the mind of citizens that the rights of the individuals are protected always, even when the protection of those rights permit contradictions to the ideas of the then majority. Marx said that society must be of one class and since it is of only one class it would be considered a classless society. Within this classless society all people would conform to the same ideology. This is in direct contrast to the intent of the founding fathers. The principles upon which the United States was founded protected the individual whose beliefs did not conform to the then thinking of the majority. Our founders understood the freedoms protected in the first amendment were critical to freedom and independence. Marx, along with all collectivists, including the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) understand that these protected freedoms do not promote conformity. Conformity is critical to a Collectivist society. Thus, we have seen the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) attempt to redefine these individual freedoms through legislation, court rulings, executive orders and regulations, and through MOB rule. Violence and intimidation have always been key tools employed by the Collectivist. We have two very distinct visions for the Untied States. Those on the right see an America that encourages and celebrates the individual, protecting the rights of all individuals even when they disagree, that believes the core family is the strength of a free and independent nation, that believes the values of children should be taught by the parents and not by government, that the less government we have the stronger is our nation, and that God is the giver of our basic rights and is ultimate sovereign of all. The Collectivist believes in the supremacy or sovereignty of the state, that the rights and dreams of the individual are the province of government with all allegiance due government, and that long-standing principles, morality, and religion have no place in their perceived all conforming, totally equal, and classless society. This vision has always led to a total destruction of society, both socially and financially. These are the two visions presented to Americans today. Understand under which you wish to live and then cast your vote accordingly. We hear the term that so and so is not presidential and therefore should not be elected. We also hear that certain people are not paying their fair share in taxes. What exactly is “presidential” and what is “fair”.
Brennan to Trump: 'Clean up your act' and 'try to act presidential'. What we are not told is what is presidential. Is it presidential for instance to receive sexual favors from an intern in the Oval Office? Is it presidential to go around Europe apologizing for the success of the capitalist system of the United States? Is it presidential to bow to Muslim leaders of other countries? Is it presidential to denounce local police officers not having the facts of the situation? Is it presidential to include a group of sworn haters of local police into a personal meeting in the White House? Is it presidential to promote people within the executive branch after it is proven they have lied to congress? Is it presidential to declare over dozens of times that a certain act would be unconstitutional and then perform the act anyway? Is it presidential to sign an agreement guaranteeing cash and the ability to develop nuclear arms with a country who has stated it is their goal to destroy the United States? Yes, Mr. Brennan, exactly what is presidential. The American people are constantly being told that certain segments of the American population are not paying their fair share of taxes – they are not sharing enough of their wealth. The natural question to be asked is “please tell us, just exactly what would be fair,” and of course we are never given a number. In 2015, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined, but we were still told that that is not fair. In many instances, those who are supposedly not paying their fair share are paying in excess of 50% of their incomes when federal, state, and local taxes are calculated, but apparently that is not fair. So just exactly what is fair we ask. I am aware of only one collectivist who actually stated a number and said that was fair and that was Franklin Roosevelt. FDR produced an executive order in which he stated that any taxable income over $25,000 (that is 1940’s dollars) was to be confiscated at the rate of 100%. FDR went on to say that that was fair. The guru of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party, Karl Marx, said that all income should be confiscated by the government and then redistributed based on need with need being defined by the elite class of Marxist/Progressives (Democrats). This appears to be the real goal of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party of today. After all, they are following the other dictates of Marx, including Marx’s call to abolish all long-standing principles, all morality, and all religion. When you Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) use terms like “presidential” or “fair,” please define what you mean. So far everything you have done and everything you are doing is following the direct commands of your guru, Karl Marx. It would seem, without explanation and definition, you really intend to continue to follow the dictates of Karl Marx until the United States has been fundamentally transformed into the Marxist totalitarian state as promised by Comrade Obama. Desperation brings on desperate acts. For months and months, we have heard about the inevitable “blue wave” that would sweep through American and not only swing the House into the Marxist/Progressive column but also swing the Senate. The polls are very hard to read now days because they are used more as political tools than they are used as actual predictors, but it is hard to argue that the polls are debunking the predicted “blue wave”. The senate race in North Dakota keeps putting Cramer in a larger and larger lead. The DA race in Minnesota has now turned dramatically against Ellison. The biggest predicted upset of all; that being the senate race in Texas appears to be firmly red. Even Perez and Sanders are now stepping back from the “blue wave” theory.
The Marxist/Progressives thought if they were crafty with the Kavanaugh confirmation and pulled a last-minute stunt of releasing a damaging but apparently faulty letter claiming Kavanagh was a sexual predator, not only would that prevent the confirmation of Kavanaugh, but it would also create even a larger “blue wave” and possibly even a “blue tsunami.” Schumer, Feinstein, and Durbin were wrong. Kavanaugh was rightfully confirmed and the American public saw that these accusations were nothing but search and destroy missions. We know this because the accusers, people who were cajoled into making unproveable, false accusations have been discarded and long forgotten by the Marxist/Progressives. When that action failed, we saw the Marxist/Progressives assist in the “caravan” of supposedly poor, oppressed migrants coming to the United States “for a better life.” These people are in fact thumbing their noses at the Untied States and playing the typical victim hood card played by Marxist/Progressives throughout the world. Meanwhile they carry flags of the country that was supposedly oppressing them and burning the flag of the United States. It is also obvious that some sinister force is behind this movement, Marxist/Progressives, and the intent was to cause a crisis that would result in an outpouring of compassion for people whose intent is to invade our country and violate our laws. This action also seems to be having the opposite impact than what was the Marxist/Progressives intent. The polls continue to look less and less favorable for the Marxist/Progressive’s intended “blue wave” movement. As the situation become more and more desperate, it would appear we have another misguided desperate attempt by the Marxist/Progressive hierarchy to turn reverse the current political movement of the Republicans gaining seats in the Senate, holding control of the house, and sending Farrakhan lover Keith Ellison into the private sector where he can sexually assault women out of the eyes of the public. The breaking news this morning: The Secret service has intercepted two packages containing possible explosive devices that were addressed to the homes of Hillary and Bill Clinton as well as Barack and Michelle Obama. In a statement released Wednesday morning, Secret Service agents said the two packages were flagged during a routine mail screening and intercepted. Agents also confirmed the packages were not received by the former first families. Both the FBI and Secret Service are investigating the incidents, which they believe may be connected to the pipe bomb that was found in the mailbox of billionaire George Soros earlier in this week. The White House has condemned the attempted attacks. In a statement, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders denounced the threatening stunts, saying “these terrorizing acts” are despicable. Sanders also vowed anyone responsible will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. She then said Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies are investigating and will take all appropriate actions to protect anyone threatened by these cowards. Recent reports claimed a suspicious package addressed to the White house was also intercepted, however, the Secret Service has since stated this information is incorrect. This story has all the typical signs of desperation of the DNC. These would be actions that would draw national attention and allow the Marxist/Progressive pundits to try to explain away the actions of Marxist/Progressive MOBS by comparing them to supposed MOBS of the right. These would be actions that would swing sympathy to the Marxist/Progressives. What will be revealed, I predict, is that we will learn these were not really threatening devices and that the perpetrators were actually Marxist/Progressives who intended that the packages would be intercepted, and the public would assume this was the work of a right-wing extremist. This is exactly the type of prank the Marxist/Progressives comrades, Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, and Chavez would have done. The sad thing is when this prank fails to bring the desired effect, what desperate act will the desperate Marxist/Progressives try next. November 6th is very close. 10/23/2018 YOU ARE A RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST ACCORDING TO THE MARXIST/PROGRESSIVES (DEMOCRATS) IFRead Now You are a right-wing extremist if you believe the United States Constitution was written to protect the American citizen from the tyranny of government. Patrick Henry said, "The Constitution is not a document for the government to restrain the people: it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."
You are a right-wing extremist if you hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The key here is endowed by the Creator and not by man nor government and right to life applies to the conceived but unborn. You are a right-wing extremist if you hold that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances and you will protect these rights even for those with whom you do not agree. You are a right-wing extremist if you believe male and female he created them. You are a right-wing extremist if you believe borders are geographic boundaries of political entities or legal jurisdictions, such as governments, sovereign states, and federated states and it is the right of that entity to protect those borders from those who would wish to enter illegally. You are a right-wing extremist if honor the flag and you do not destroy the flag, if you rise during the national anthem and do not kneel during the national anthem, and if you put your hand over your heart while saying the Pledge of Allegiance. You are a right-wing extremist if you are patriotic and wish to preserve the special freedom and character of our individualist values and do not adhere to the socialist values of the collectivist movement. AND ACCORDING TO THE OBAMA DHS YOU ARE A RIGHT-WING EXTREMIST IF: Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration. Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers. Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point, and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent. All people throughout the world had come to understand that politicians would make grave pronouncements and then adjust those pronouncements by adjusting the time, the amount of money, or just backing down. We saw this time after time during the budget crisis of countries in the European Union, especially Greece. Greece was told they must conform and adhere to the budget demands of the European Union only to have the terms of the demand by the EU changed or adjusted by the World Bank and other large banks. We saw it with Obama drawing his line in the sand only to completely back away from his threat and open the door for Russia to become the strong player in the Middle East. Obama used the same tough language when discussing Iran only to not only give Iran what they demanded to sign a one-sided agreement in their favor but made suggestions to the Iranians on how they could have an even more favorable agreement than what they had originally said they wanted.
Ronald Reagan was an exception to the rule and the press criticized Reagan when he refused to play the game that was the norm in the political world. Reagan insisted on “trust by verify” and because the world quickly learned that Reagan was different from the political norm, his policies brought down the Soviet empire. Israel has also been a nation that means what they say and say what they mean. The political left has strongly criticized Israel for doing exactly what they say they will do, but if Israel did not the political left would have exactly what they want; a world with no Israel. Now the world has learned there is a new type of President in the White House. No longer does the occupant of the White House apologize for the Untied States, make statements he will not enforce, or encourage anybody and everybody, mostly those who want to destroy the United States, to come into our country illegally. Even though President Trump has his hands tied when it comes to protecting the citizens of the United States regarding our lack of meaningful immigration policies, he has done a great job even though his tools are greatly limited. A very important part of Trump’s strategy to protect the American public from our enemies coming across our border illegally is that he has highlighted the fact that the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are openly encouraging those people who despise the principles of freedom protected by our Constitution and hate America as much as do the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), to come into the United States any way they can. We see a large number of people marching toward our border now. Many of these people represent groups like ISIS that hate the Untied States. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are supporting and encouraging this movement. President Trump had early stated to the Central American countries that this action is not acceptable. The Central American countries paid no heed, apparently thinking that Obama was still in the White House. These Central American countries are learning that a typical politician was not elected to be President of the United States in 2017. President Trump declared that the U.S. will start blocking federal aid to Central American countries for failing to contain the migrant caravan. In a recent tweet, the president said Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador were not able to do the job of stopping people from leaving their country and illegally coming to the U.S so the U.S. will now begin cutting off or substantially reducing the massive foreign aid routinely given to them. It is also reported that the military is being readied to go to the border to protect the sovereignty of the Untied States and the citizens of the United States. Indeed, Obama is no longer in the White House and Hilary Clinton calls a place in New York home. Perhaps Theresa May should look across the Ocean and take the actions of President Trump as an example for her in implementing Brexit. Great Britain would be free from the entanglement that is the European Union and would have left on very favorable terms. Thank you, President Trump, for saying what you mean and then acting in accordance. It is so refreshing. Isn’t it great to live in a time when we can be anything we want to be just by calling ourselves something different. Elizabeth Warren can be Indian because she wants to be, because she needs a job, because she has high cheekbones, and because she comes from Oklahoma. Rachel Dolezal can be black because she has curly hair, she wants to be a part of the NAACP, and she thinks it would be a good thing. Men can be women and women can be men because they believe they prefer the toys of the opposite sex, they prefer to dress like the opposite sex, or they like to or do not like make-up. These same people who believe anything can be what you want it to be also say beginning has no real meaning. Because they redefine beginning they justify murdering babies because they excuse their murdering of these babies because they say the act of murder is a healthcare issue, it is choice, or abortion.
This same group is again attacking President Trump because the Trump administration has proposed a legal definition of gender as determined "on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.” What an absolute outrage that a person would define a man and a woman based on biology. That the Bible says in Genesis chapter 5 and verse 2 “Male and female he created them” has no bearing on these people thinking either the Bible or a scientific explanation confirming the Bible , especially since they believe the Bible is at most a guideline for living and not Gods revelation to man and science is to be used only when you think it supports your position. In their world anything can mean whatever is most convenient at the time. This people liked and understood Obama’s definition for gender when Obama said biology is just a figment of the imagination and adopted a definition of gender that recognized peoples' self-definitions of their identities. Apparently when God created humans, Gods real intent was to allow the individual to chose if they were going to be male, female, or something in between and the science of biology was irrelevant. These same people are trying to tell us that apparently just like science and the Bible are living concepts and can mean what we want them to mean to fit our objectives, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights are also subjective and have no real meaning. Just recently we learned that advice and consent really mean search and destroy and conviction of treason or bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors really means a different opinion on policy. These are all examples of how the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) will follow the directives of Karl Marx explicitly while applying total subjectivity in all other areas. Marx told his followers that all long standing principles must be nullified so we can now be what ever race we chose regardless of DNA, we can be any sex we desire ignoring biology and the Bible, we can murder so long as the victim is called a fetus, and we can impeach because we do not like an individual or do not agree with the individual. Is it any wonder the collectivist society has always failed when they can not even decide on what is night and what is day? I am apparently a minority of one. I have heard that Professor Ford was a compelling witness in her proclamation about Justice Kavanaugh being a sexual predator. I listened to the testimony she gave and heard from every one of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) on the Judiciary Committee that they believed Professor Ford before even asking her a question. Then I read the headlines the several days following her testimony and learned that I appeared to be a minority of one, because I not only did not believe Professor Fords testimony, I thought she fabricated the whole story. In fact, I found Secretary Clinton’s testimony on Benghazi more compelling and believable than Dr. Fords.
Secretary Clinton clearly lied about the cause of the Benghazi attack, her testimony and facts clearly revealed that she knew from the start the movie had nothing to do with the attack. The facts showed the attack was a planned attack by Muslim enemies of the United States. Yes, Secretary Clinton changed her story a few times, but Prof. Ford never told the same story twice. Secretary Clinton at least used dates and times and even acknowledged that four people were killed, but not of course because of her incompetency, but the incompetency of others. Other individuals even collaborated what Secretary Clinton stated. Not one individual named by Prof. Ford, even one of her “dear” friends, remembered anything about the evening or the incident Prof. Ford was so sure happened. Secretary Clinton was emotional and engaged with the members of Congress as was Prof. Ford. Secretary Clinton was asked some difficult questions. Prof. Ford was not asked one difficult question by the Marxist/Progressive (Democrats) on the Committee, and softball questions by the lady questioning her. Even the softball questions, or maybe honest questions asked by the lady, revealed serious false statements issued by the people of Prof. Ford. The single thing that did not change for Prof. Ford was that it was Justice Kavanaugh that committed the act she claimed happened. Of course, that was the single component of her complicated story that worked to her advantage and that of the Marxist/Progressives, and that was to keep Judge Kavanaugh from becoming a Justice on the Supreme Court. Minority leader Schumer had already stated, even before Judge Kavanaugh was nominated, that he would do anything – yes anything – to keep any nominee of President Trump from being confirmed. In this case, Schumer kept his word by finding a willing accomplice in Prof. Ford and used her to attempt to attain the stated goal of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party. I am also apparently a minority of one in thinking that the disappearance and apparent killing of Jamal Khashoggi, although a noteworthy story because of the intrigue, is not an international incident that deserves the threats of headline hunting congressman in the United States. Once again, these headline hunters are willing to jump to conclusions and issue harsh and irresponsible threats of retaliation. Khashoggi had previously been used by the Saudi government to communicate with Osama bin Laden. What is not being reported is how close that association became or what other nefarious activities in which Khashoggi might have become entangled. There is good reason to believe that this hit, if it happened which is looking more and more like it did, was the result of certain factions believing they had been betrayed by Khashoggi totally unrelated to anything to do with those currently at the very top of the Saudi government. Nevertheless, our headline hunters understand and know everything about this killing. We never had the headlines nor the demand to learn the facts when 27-Year-Old DNC Staffer Seth Rich was shot and killed while walking home late one night in Washington DC. We were told that this act of violence was committed by a random thieve and were expected to believe this story even though nothing was taken from young Rich. Unofficial evidence revealed that Rich was a social acquaintance of Awan, an employee of many Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) who was indicted for bank fraud while accusations of using his employment to sell government secrets was not investigated. Both Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Xavier Becerra refused to turn over hard drives to the FBI to investigate and destroyed the hard drives at some point in time. Credible information that Rich was instrumental in leaking emails of the DNC to be released to the public, so the DNC could blame Trump and the Republicans for stealing and then releasing the emails for political purposes, was buried. This story of Seth Rich is off limits for investigation. The story of the Awan’s also seems to be off limits. We know the connection of both related stories runs deep into the DNC and the Clinton campaign. For what I would say were very apparent reasons, the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) and the mainstream press want these stories buried, but why the Republicans have not been more inquisitive has me perplexed. Khashoggi we want investigated and we want all the facts revealed. Seth Rich, we could care less. Khashoggi was a very shady individual and his story will probably be used as the basis for a best-selling book someday. Seth Rich and the Awan’s will become footnotes that never see the light of day. The Seth Rich and the Awan’s story hold many secrets that should be revealed. However, it certainly appears that if revealed many who have walked the halls of congress including Wasserman-Schultz and Becerra would have an abrupt halt to their political aspirations and would even face wearing orange jumpsuits as their daily attire. Yes, I do believe Professor Ford was a political pawn of the Marxist/Progressives to be used by Schumer and has now been totally discarded, and yet her story will live on casting a shadow over Justice Kavanaugh. I did not find Prof. Ford either compelling or believable. No, I do not find Clinton believable about Benghazi or most everything else. Yes, I find the story on Khashoggi to be of international intrigue, fit for a book and eventually a movie, but no I do not find it worthy of changing the course of our international relations. No, I do not think the stories of Seth Rich and the Awan’s should be buried. It appears there is much to be revealed that would also, if it saw the light of day, make a fascinating story for a book on national lies and deceit and make a revealing movie. I do understand why Wasserman-Schultz and Becerra want this story buried and why they destroyed the hard drives, learning from Clinton that destroyed evidence is the best evidence for hiding and covering nefarious acts. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
September 2024
Categories |
RSS Feed