Senator Rand Paul physician serving as the junior United States Senator from Kentucky since 2011, alongside Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. … Paul was a candidate for the Republican nomination at the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Jim Phillips, Chairman and CEO of Covenant Ventures. Jim has founded and co-founded many successful corporations and earning prominent leadership positions with Motorola, SkyTel, iPix, Telular, and The FedEx Institute of Technology, while inventing and introducing many products used by millions worldwide. His innovative contributions and business leadership have been chronicled in many national publications including Forbes, Fortune, Business Week, The Standard, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today. He has made numerous appearances on Fox News, CNN, CNBC, the BBC, and CBS Morning News.
TOPIC: American Exceptionalism!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Conservative Commandos Radio Showhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show2019-08-17 05:36:582019-08-17 05:37:41PODCAST: Senator Rand Paul on American Exceptionalism!
I asked this question on social media, where I interact with people across the political spectrum: What happens on Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the election?
It’s a legitimate worry. Based on what happened after November 2016, the day after this next election will tell us where our democracy stands. Because we’re setting the stage where whichever side loses they may feel justified in claiming it was rigged or illegal, and the 2020 winner is illegitimate.
This is hardly unfounded considering both what we know and what we are seeing coming.
First, on the Left.
Given that the Left and most Democrats have lived at Defcon One since the day after the 2016 election; given that they have called Trump a white supremacist, a racist, a Russian agent, an existential threat to the Republic, and have run from the beginning with the hashtag NotMyPresident; given that Antifa is allowed to grow and even control at times a major U.S. city and other violence has been common; given that Russia will interfere again (which can be assumed because they have for generations); then what can we expect on the day after the election if Trump is victorious?
Will the Left’s fury just be spent and they will attempt an inward evaluation of the Democratic Party as the GOP did in 2012? That doesn’t seem to be the tenor of the revolutionaries and those playing to them.
It seems more likely that there could well be a far worse response from the Left than there has been since 2016. Maybe not just mass demonstrations, but actual riots. After all, four more years of an existential threat, a foreign agent in the White House? Many would feel fully justified in taking extreme actions.
How about on the right?
If over the next 16 months the media continues to act in a blatantly partisan way; if social media increasingly bans, de-platforms and generally cuts off access to Republicans (under the guise of hate speech) while tilting the field to Democrats; if tech companies take conservative websites offline (not just the extremist fringe sites); if Democrats in Congress, no less, continue to dox and put a physical target on the back of Trump and GOP donors; if mainstream media outlets block effective Republican advertisements (essentially, the left greatly reducing Trump and Republicans’ ability to communicate with voters); and then Trump loses, how will the right respond?
There may be a sense of justification for extreme action. It seems less likely, because generally, other than the rather subdued Tea Party movement, conservatives rarely take to the streets and never refuse to accept election results. (Remember, Democrats already have twice this century.)
But we are in somewhat uncharted water. There would arise a fringe element on the right that could react in extra-legal ways. The frustration level would be sky-high if most of the above conditions are in place.
If neither side will accept 2020, then we actually do have an existential threat.
This situation is even more dangerous than a socialist winning the presidency, as horrible as that would be. We have seen over and over how the Framers’ genius has spared us from terrible leadership. However, if the American public does not accept election results, that genius is for naught.
Democrats were right in saying ahead of 2016 — when they were sure Hillary would win — that Republicans and Trump need to accept the results (which was always going to happen) but then unfortunately those Democrats chose not to accept them when Hillary lost. Remember, Hillary still travels around saying she won, just as Democrat Stacey Abrams does after losing the Georgia governor’s race by a handy amount.)
On my social media, everyone on the right said they would accept the results, but almost none of them thought that Democrats would. Most on the left, but given that my connections are not the radical side of the Democratic Party, said they would essentially cry all night and move on. They were not so sure what the right and Trump supporters would do.
My guess, and it is only that, is that if Sen. Kamala Harris or Sen. Elizabeth Warren win the election, the right will essentially accept it, even with all those elements stacked against us. But it’s only a guess.
On the other side, I can barely imagine what the left and Democrats will do if Trump is re-elected, because I could never have imagined the hysteria and violence that has followed his initial election.
What happens Nov. 4, 2020 will tell us where our democracy stands.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Rod Thomsonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRod Thomson2019-08-16 17:14:252019-08-16 17:18:38What Happens On November 4, 2020?
While driving on a beautiful day in West Virginia, I heard this news reported over my car radio. Democrat presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren said Michael Brown was “murdered” by a “white” policeman in Ferguson Mo. I became filled with anger. I thought, “This wicked woman’s presidential run should be over.” Everyone knows Brown was shot while assaulting a police officer in his patrol car while Brown tried to take the officer’s gun.
This insidiously evil lie by Warren tells voters everything they need to know about her. Obsessed with gaining power, Warren has decided that the lives of brave and honorable police officers and the lives of Americans potentially killed in a race war are acceptable collateral damage to achieve her goal – the White House.
My thoughts raced back to the heartbreaking Facebook post by 13 year old Jaden Ramos. Jaden’s dad was a NYC police officer who was assassinated along with another officer while sitting in their cruiser on special patrol doing crime reduction work.
Jaden and numerous other children of police officers lost their fathers because Democrats and fake news media lied about the Brown shooting in Ferguson and other incidents. Consequently, Black Lives Matter declared it “open season” on killing police and white people. Angry black youths responded with revenge assassinations of police across America.
Jaden posted: “Today I had to say bye to my father. He was their for me everyday of my life, he was the best father I could ask for. It’s horrible that someone gets shot dead just for being a police officer. Everyone says they hate cops but they are the people that they call for help. I will always love you and I will never forget you. RIP Dad.”
For Warren to reignite the “Brown was murdered” lie five years later is beyond the pale. Warren deceptively markets herself as having superior compassion for victims. In reality, Warren is cold and calculating; willing to say anything in her perverse quest for power to control every aspect of our lives. Elizabeth Warren is a despicable human being.
If you watch, people always show you who they really are. Years ago, I attended a meeting in Washington DC. I met a politician who sounded great. After the meeting, away from cameras and microphones, he treated his assistant humiliatingly. My opinion of him suffered.
Just like her fake Indian heritage, Warren has shown us that her self-proclaimed superior compassion is fake also.
Warren’s irresponsible lie about the circumstances of Brown’s death so infuriated me because it sent a clarion call to blacks to kill more cops. I have had my fill of Democrats instigating hate, violence and divisiveness while falsely portraying themselves as paragons of superior compassion. Meanwhile, Democrats’ fake news media buddies demonize decent everyday Americans for opposing socialism and anti-Americanism.
Does character matter when selecting our leaders? Absolutely.
“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when a wicked man rules, the people groan.” Proverbs 29:2.
President George Washington said, “…a good moral character is the first essential in a man…It is therefore highly important that you should endeavor not only to be learned but virtuous.”
Presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and their fellow Democrats instigating the murdering of police by continuing to lie about Michael Brown is the polar opposite of virtuous.
“The people “have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge– I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.” John Adams
“The qualities of a great man are “vision, integrity, courage, understanding, the power of articulation, and profundity of character.” Dwight Eisenhower
“Character is the only secure foundation of the state.” Calvin Coolidge
“Americanism is a question of principle, of purpose, of idealism, of character. It is not a matter of birthplace or creed or line of descent.” Theodore Roosevelt
“Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.: “I desire so to conduct the affairs of this administration that if at the end, when I come to lay down the reins of power, I have lost every other friend on earth, I shall at least have one friend left, and that friend shall be down inside me.” Abraham Lincoln
Since having to defend President Bill Clinton’s serial adultery and numerous allegations of sexual assault, Democrats and fake news media say expecting character in our leaders is unrealistic.
Elizabeth Warren seated in the big chair in the Oval Office would be the equivalent of wicked Hillary on steroids; severely punishing achievers, disarming law abiding gun-owners, jailing political opponents, dividing Americans into groups that hate each other, persecuting Christians, killing babies after birth, crushing our economy and government tyrannically micromanaging our lives.
As president, Warren’s lack of character would reap horrifying and devastating consequences. Who in their right mind would vote for a presidential candidate who is complicit in the murdering of police? Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren must never be allowed anywhere near becoming leader of the free world.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Lloyd Marcushttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLloyd Marcus2019-08-15 19:11:122019-08-15 19:13:40Pocahontas’ Presidential Run Should be Over
The title of this column is no joke. Given the recent national discussion of rats in cities like Baltimore, Maryland you would think that the word “rat” would be triggering. But not for Democrats.
In an August 14th, 2019 email titled “will you host a book club event?” American transgender rights activist and Deputy Director of All On The Line Raffi Freedman-Gurspan, wrote:
Our team here at All On The Line is really excited for our first-ever book club night — we have local events registered in communities all across the country! Can we count on you to host a book club event?
Sign up to host an AOTL book club event in your community on August 29 at 8 p.m. ET!
As I started reading the book, this quote from the introduction really stood out to me and centers the reason why we chose “Ratf**ked” as our first book:
“This is the story of the actual redrawing of the American political map and of our democracy itself. It’s the story of how Republicans turned a looming demographic disaster into legislative majorities so unbreakable, so impregnable, that none of the outcomes are in doubt until after the 2020 census… It is legal, it’s breathtaking, and much of it happened in plain sight.”
In order to address map manipulation and end gerrymandering, we need to understand how our maps became this messed up in the first place. Author David Daley spells out how one party rewrote the rules and redrew lines to maintain their power — and how those gerrymandered maps impacted policy and progress for a decade.
But we have a chance to secure fair maps in 2021, and that’s why we’re building this movement! I hope you’ll host a local book club event this month to learn more from Daley himself, and then hear from AOTL about the fight to end gerrymandering and how you can get involved.
In a critically powerful step in our fight to restore fairness to our democracy, the NDRC’s 501(c)(4) affiliate, the National Redistricting Action Fund (NRAF), and Organizing for Action (OFA) are combining forces to go all-in on the fightto end gerrymandering and to have a government that better represents the people. By incorporating OFA’s grassroots infrastructure fully into our efforts, NRAF will engage this powerful grassroots network to organize, educate, and engage supporters both in the digital space and on the ground to restore fair representation to Congress and state legislatures.
The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that federal courts are powerless to hear challenges to partisan gerrymandering, the practice in which the party that controls the state legislature draws voting maps to help elect its candidates.
The vote was 5 to 4, with the court’s more conservative members in the majority. In a momentous decision, the court closed the door on such claims.
The drafters of the Constitution, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority, understood that politics would play a role in drawing election districts when they gave the task to state legislatures. Judges, the chief justice said, are not entitled to second-guess lawmakers’ judgments.
So how does All On The Line, the National Redistricting Action Fund and Obama’s Organizing for Action intend to solve “map manipulation and end gerrymandering?” The only way to do that is for Democrats to retake control of state legislatures and do their own gerrymandering.
This is their goal. Make no mistake about it. Obama and Raffi Freedman-Gurspan want to end Republican gerrymandering and replace it with Democratic gerrymandering.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-08-15 05:22:502019-08-17 07:41:38Obama’s Democrats to host a book club event. Their first book is “Ratf**ked.” 50 Shades of Baltimore?
Ever since the El Paso shooting, talk of racism has been ratcheted up. Racism certainly is a problem, too, one accompanied by another problem: Those talking most about it appear to know least what it actually is. But try this on for size:
How about when you emphasize only the relatively rare killings committed by one particular racial group while ignoring murders in which its members are victims, in order to make it appear a unique threat?
For the uninitiated, that group would be whites. Of course, not only is the above happening with respect to them, but the El Paso shooting is also being used to demonize effective anti-illegal-migration rhetoric. The argument is that “Trump’s racist rhetoric” inspired the murderer to target Hispanics.
On December 7, 1993, a black man, Colin Ferguson, targeted white people with a handgun on a Long Island Railroad train, killing six passengers and injuring several others.
One of two black snipers who killed whites in the Washington, D.C., area in 2002, John Allen Muhammad, said that he’d intended to murder six whites a day for 30 days. He believed that “the white man is the devil.”
In 2010, black man Omar Thornton targeted whites at his workplace in Manchester, Conn., killing eight.
In 2016, black man Micah Xavier Johnson shot 12 Dallas police officers, killing five; he’d told authorities that he wanted to kill white people. (Barack Obama’s anti-police rhetoric comes to mind here.)
Black man Fredrick Demond Scott was charged in 2017 with the killings of two white men in Missouri and is suspected in the deaths of three others. He’d said that he wanted to “kill all white people.”
In April 2017, black man Kori Ali Muhammad, who’d called white people “devils” on social media, murdered three Caucasian men in Fresno with a .357 revolver.
Though not all involve murder, numerous other examples of black-on-white racial attacks can be found here, here and here.
If you’re wondering what kind of people perpetrate these incidents, watch the video below.
No, the above is not from the 2016 Democratic National Convention. Speaking of today’s anti-white party, however, will it ever have to answer for all the attacks on whites? Will people such as Tina Rutnick (a.k.a. Kirsten Gillibrand), Irish Bob O’Rourke, Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker and the rest of their fellow travelers be condemned for talking about white privilege and how America is supposedly a white-supremacist nation and their continual (whether explicit or implicit) impugning of whites?
For that matter, will academia, the media and entertainment be held accountable for pushing these prejudices? We know the answer. But let’s now delve a little deeper.
It’s unlikely there’s a cause anywhere that hasn’t had evil done in its name. There have been both “left-wing” and “right-wing” terrorists, running the gamut from environmentalists and animal rights activists to sovereign citizens and other anti-government types. For the wrong cause can be advanced in the wrong or right way (e.g., political lobbying), and the right cause can be advanced in the right or wrong way. Thus, a cause’s worst actors are not at all a gauge of its validity.
It’s also absolutely true that the rhetoric we use matters. Words are powerful, after all; hence the saying “The pen is mightier than the sword.” Moreover, even proper rhetoric used to promote a good cause can inspire the deranged to violence.
Yet what are the implications of this? Should media not report on, and should we not inveigh against, child sex abuse in the clergy or the Boy Scouts because some unhinged individual might attack an innocent clergyman or scouting troop leader?
In this vein, it’s safe to say that many (and probably most) of the attacks on whites wouldn’t have occurred were it not for the anti-white critiques prevalent in politics, the media, academia and entertainment. And though the El Paso shooter convincingly explained in his manifesto that his anti-immigration views predated President Trump’s rise, it’s likely that anti-illegal migration rhetoric has sparked some kind of attack somewhere. Yet, again, none of this tells us anything about either type of rhetoric’s validity.
But can it really be the case that a public figure is never morally complicit in violence associated with his rhetoric? Yet if the violence alone doesn’t implicate him, what does?
Answer: his words’ falsity.
In this post-Truth time, this simple reality is overlooked. Leftists are responsible for the attacks against whites because their rhetoric against them is pure demagoguery built on lies. What’s the truth? In brief (a comprehensive refutation of caucaphobia is here), whites probably weren’t the first to practice slavery or violate human rights. But they were the first to end slavery, and they birthed our modern concept of human rights in the first place. In fact, their Western Civilization can largely be credited with creating the whole modern world.
In contrast, it’s a fact that we’re subject to an “invasion,” as Trump (and many before him, including yours truly) has put it. It is a fact that Democrats are facilitating this. It is a fact that they’re doing it for political power.
It’s also a reality that immigrationist social engineers are very happy to replace European-descent Americans with Third Worlders who they know will, upon naturalization, vote for leftists, as even Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson has pointed out. That the El Paso shooter also mentioned “replacement” doesn’t make it any less true, not anymore than Ted Kaczynski’s bombings changed what he warned about: the threat that technology (e.g., artificial intelligence) could possibly pose to man.
And why is this even controversial? The demographic shift is well-known — left-wing outlet NPR has called it “the browning of America” — and is no accident: It’s the result of immigration policy the Left could change if it wanted to. It doesn’t want to.
What the Left does want to do is use the El Paso tragedy to remove any remaining stumbling blocks to its immigrationist endeavors. Liberals now want “invasion” (and even “illegal alien”) considered a racist term. This is nothing new, either, as the Left has already tried to demonize things such as “Build that wall!” chants and “MAGA” hats. The idea is that anything rhetorically effective for conservatives — anything that could possibly influence people — should be labeled racist and thus be out of bounds. (By the way, would this include anti-immigrationist remarks such as “Europe belongs to the Europeans,” uttered last year by infamous “white supremacist” the Dalai Lama?) Hey, the side that defines the vocabulary of a debate wins the debate.
This is why all of us — President Trump, you and I — should double down. We are being invaded. The problem isn’t those of us who warn about it, but the people making it happen.
Everyone has rhetoric. And if leftists can tell their lies, can’t we at least tell the truth?
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Selwyn Dukehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSelwyn Duke2019-08-14 14:15:552019-08-16 19:05:11El Paso and Trump? And What Rhetoric Causes the Shooting of Whites?
Speaking to Texas Senator Ted Cruz, Epstein states that his “research over the past six years shows that Google, via various deliberate manipulations, moved between 2.6 million to 10.4 million votes to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential race.”
Cruz pointed out that in 2016, the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign’s number one financial supporter was the parent company of Google, Alphabet.
Adding further significance to the conversation on election interference, Epstein warned that the figure of 2.6 million was “rock bottom minimum” in terms of votes influenced. More accurately, he said, the range for Google’s election interference was between 2.6 million to 10.4 million votes depending on how aggressive Google was in their techniques.
Those techniques included search engine result manipulation, search suggestion manipulation and affecting answers.
The exchange between Senator Cruz and Epstein also warned that none of these Google interference tactics are competitive.
Instead, Silicon Valley giants like Google have these tools exclusively at their disposal, which raises the question of whether a handful of Silicon Valley billionaires can be trusted with that much influence.
The testimony came at the same time that presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard initiated a lawsuit against Google for $50 million. According to Vice News, the legal complaint centers on the allegation that,
“Google unfairly barred the Hawaii congresswoman from buying ads… [Google] has been criticized by many on the Right for censoring content that favors conservative viewpoints. However, Google’s favoritism of political and policy ideas is more nuanced and self-serving. Simply put, Google supports viewpoints, political causes, and candidates that favors its policy positions over those that do not.”
Gabbard’s campaign was looking to buy ad space in a six-hour window following the first Democratic presidential debate — a debate which she gave an outstanding statement on the “War on Terror.”
While the televised speech was watched by millions of followers, Gabbard understood that it would be critical to her campaign to ride that wave by marketing the event through digital media.
In a report by The New York Times, the lawsuit also outlines the Gabbard campaign’s belief that “its emails were being placed in spam folders on Gmail at ‘a disproportionately high rate’ when compared with emails from other Democratic candidates.”
The recent accusations against Google aren’t raised in a vacuum.
As Clarion Project has previously reported, Google has been caught teaming up with Chinese authorities in surveillance and prosecution measures over China’s Muslim population.
Moreover, Google has been called out for supporting a tracking app that allows Saudi men to control their wives’ and daughters’ movements.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Clarion Projecthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngClarion Project2019-08-13 18:17:282019-08-13 18:17:28Move Over Russia: Google Takes Lead in Election Interference [Video]
It’s a little hard to believe actually, but faithful Catholics are growing more and more concerned that Pope Francis’ Vatican is on some kind of tear to advance globalism, and there’s not only a lot of evidence to support the notion, there is, at the same time, not a lot of evidence to dispute the idea.
Globalism is, in short, a governing system whereby individual nations cede, or hand over, some of their national sovereignty to a kind of collective government.
So by definition, globalism and nationalism are pretty much in opposition. And faithful Catholics should not let their eyes glaze over on this, but remain, at least for the time being, up at the 60,000-foot level.
This whole issue is being played out in U.S. politics right now among the Democrats, and so naturally, the U.S. bishops have gotten involved in all this as well.
Here is the extremely critical gigantic point to remember: Globalism would usher in one supranational governing authority that would have complete control as though every current nation were just a single state in the worldwide nation.
If any Catholic — orthodox, or even dissenting — can’t see the immediate theological, political and cultural problems with that, then they have no pulse, brain or both.
The globalists have been running wild for the past few decades, extolling what they say are the “advantages” of globalism. Indeed, the very concept of the European Union is a regionalized stab at globalism, despite its difficulties.
Pope Francis and his globalist cheerleader crowd in Rome are posturing that the very foundational concept of individual nations are now little else than nostalgic entities which have become overrun by giant transnational corporations.
To carry the thought further, these corporations are all greedy, exploit the poor of the earth, poison the environment and are able to get away with all of it because they get to hide behind and operate through the laws of individual nations.
So for the Pope, there is only one solution to all this: abolish nations, make one-world government and reign in these greedy businesses with fines, penalties and jail time if necessary.
So, some problems:
First, this is little else than high-minded-sounding wealth redistribution, a favorite dream of political liberals — remember the encounter between Obama and Joe the Plumber on the 2008 campaign trail.
Obama and liberals are all about taking the money of industrious hard workers and giving it to people who don’t work hard or aren’t as industrious — they call that “spreading the wealth.”
Of course, Obama, Hillary and the 240,000 other Democrats running for president this year never include their own wealth in that equation; it’s just your wealth that needs to be spread around.
Second, the entire notion of such a one-world government is the ideal of Marxist communism. Even though Obama said spread the wealth, he was not the first guy with the idea. Karl Marx was.
Third, the key question: Exactly who would be the ruling class making the new laws to impose on the entire human race, and, more to the point, what if the “people” wanted to throw off this one-world government down the road, what mechanism would be in place?
Fourth, what laws precisely would be imposed, say, for example, about abortion, sodomite marriage, taxation, private property and so on?
Fifth, and when it comes to the specific area of religion, if there is one world governing body, then it stands to reason that there would have to, eventually, be one world religion — or no world religion.
Sixth, the Vatican City state is its own national sovereignty. What would happen to it as it would be absorbed into the great universal governmental bureaucratic collective?
Seventh, these liberal ideas are all the rage and have been in the West for decades, and political, theological and social atheists have sought furiously to destroy Catholic-established Western civilization. But can anyone seriously think that the Chinese Communists are going to just hand over their power to “the people”? The Chinese Commies kill people who propose those ideas.
A few days ago, in his bid to dress up one-world government, Pope Francis suggested that the very concept of nationalism had within itself “echoes of Hitler.” Them there are fightin’ words.
Their purpose is to re-awaken in Europeans the fear of National Socialism and that we should run away from that as fast as our little liberal, right-thinking feet can carry us. It’s practically a scare tactic.
So the supranational question for the supranational proposal. Hitler and company of the Third Reich were all about world domination.
That they were able to use an immoral appeal to the concept of nationalism as a springboard to world domination should be thought of.
The goal was world domination — period. So to make an appeal to the concept of nationalism as a kind of emotional blackmail to usher in what would, in the end, be world domination, is either massively uninformed or incredibly disingenuous.
And for the record, it was American nationalism during World War II — all our wealth and resources and industrial might — that proved to be the decisive factor in crushing the Nazis and then the Japanese warlords; so nationalism isn’t a bad thing after all.
Throughout history, nations have oftentimes worked as a kind of counter-balance to each other. Whether in warfare or trade or politics — whatever arena — the friction between individual national interests does oftentimes resort in overall good, even if people do tend to dwell on friction more than the good — thoughts of the space race of the 1960s between the United States and the Soviet Union come to mind.
But the discerning Catholic should keep this in mind: None of this is happening in a vacuum. It has invaded and seized control of an entire political party in the United States — guess which one.
Every major candidate for that party’s upcoming nomination has touted this concept either explicitly or in their foundational principles.
To wit, open borders; canceling all — yep, every single private health insurance plan; using U.S. tax dollars to pay for health care for illegal immigrants; using U.S. tax dollars to pay for education for illegal immigrants.
And mind you, much of that is already in place as we speak, they just want to formalize it.
Ignoring borders and border security isn’t really about economics and helping the poor, immigrants and asylum seekers. It’s really about destroying national sovereignty — which is why Pope Francis keeps bashing the idea of a wall and slamming any politically conservative American he can.
However, something the Holy Father should stop and consider as he makes these ideological pronouncements from behind the safety of his own Vatican walls, a one-world government, once installed, would very likely have high on its list the pulling down of those same walls surrounding the city-state of the Vatican.
Limousine liberals might have in mind some Marxist utopia, but the true author behind such a notion only has one goal in mind: the obliteration of the Catholic Church.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-08-13 18:00:242019-08-13 18:01:49VIDEO: The Vortex — The Pope’s New World Order
Following the mass shootings in Dayton and El Paso last week, President Trump came under fire by both the Democrats and Media for encouraging the incidents which, of course, is baseless. There was no consideration for the wackos who actually shot the people. In the minds of the Left, the President pulled the trigger, or at least that is what they want us to believe.
Campaigning at the Iowa State Fair last week, former Vice President Joe Biden claimed, “We have a problem with this rising tide of supremacy, white supremacy in America and we have a president who encourages and emboldens it.”
Biden went on to say the president “has fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation,” in both “language” and “code.”
Other Democrat presidential hopefuls made similar accusations. The Main Stream Media also made similar assertions:
There was no interest in the rationale of the shooters, they just used it as a political opportunity to blame President Trump for anything going wrong, everything from tragedy to hemorrhoids. I still insist the Democrats and Media would do this to any other Republican elected president in 2016, had it been Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, et al. They would have been smeared and vilified as much as Donald Trump. To illustrate, consider how they disparaged the character of President George W. Bush. By the end of his term, he was one of the most despised presidents, which opened the door to Barrack Obama.
The big difference though, President Trump is willing to push back, unlike other Republican presidents and much to the surprise of his opposition. Whenever they attack him, which is now a daily occurrence, he counter punches on Twitter or on camera. Whereas other Presidents accepted the abuse, President Trump does not.
The Democrats and Media are fully cognizant the president is not a racist, xenophobe, white supremacist, or whatever the adjective du jour happens to be. For example, Andrew Stein, a long term Democrat from Manhattan who has known the president since 1973, insists he is no racist. Far from it.
The Democrats and Media would have us believe the president’s rhetoric “emboldens” people to become white supremacists. In reality, it is the rhetoric emanating from the Democrats, with their lies and deception, that is angering them and causing people to form allegiance with Mr. Trump. There are simply a lot of people today who have had enough of these shenanigans and are forming ranks behind the president. The Left may like the accusations, but moderates and conservatives have had enough.
These false accusations spread by the Democrats, of course, is an old trick from the Saul Alinsky playbook, the legendary radical community organizer. Under his approach, all is fair in politics, regardless if it is ethical or not. In fact, he openly supported dirty tricks to mislead the public and elect his candidates.
In all likelihood, this approach will backfire on the Democrats in 2020. For every false assertion they make, they drive another nail into their own coffin. Should the Democrats in the House vote to impeach the president, this will not be met with enthusiasm by the public, thereby causing the president to clinch the election.
This is what happens when you do not have a bona fide party platform with positive ideas and programs to improve the country. Instead, they resort to dirty tricks. Make no mistake, it is not President Trump who is causing hate in the country, it is the Democrats, the same people who embraced slavery and Jim Crow laws, not the Republicans.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2019-08-13 06:40:442019-08-13 06:43:49Who is Creating the Culture of Hatred?
Hadley Arkes on a fair trade: The Church will not instruct a Biden or a Cuomo about politics, if they’ll stop misleading Catholics about Church teaching.
William Blackstone, that venerable commentator on the English law, remarked that it was a contradiction in terms to suggest that the law may recognize a principle of revolution. And yet, James Wilson, one of the premier minds among the American Founders, insisted that the law in America could indeed encompass a principle of revolution.
For the law in America began with the recognition that there could be an unjust law – a measure passed with all of the trappings of legality and yet wanting in the very substance of justice. Americans could readily grasp that point because they began with an understanding of moral truths and natural rights quite apart from the laws that were “posited” or enacted in any place. And that body of natural law would supply the standards for judging the rightness or justice of the things enacted as law.
But by the end of the 19th century, the natural law had become an object of derision among lawyers. In our own time, conservatives sharpened the reaction against natural law as they recoiled from liberal judges, moving outside the text of the Constitution, inventing new rights to contraception and abortion. They were false constructions of natural right, but they had to be met by showing what was false in the reasoning.
The conservatives, however, were losing their confidence in moral reasoning, and so their ingenious strategy was to avoid any hint of moral reasoning altogether.
When Robert Bork was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1987, he had shaped a remarkable record as a professor and a wise jurist, but with a deep dubiety about the natural law. At the infamous hearings over his confirmation, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, was the redoubtable Joseph Biden. Faced with a legal “positivist,” Biden thought he would embarrass Bork by staking out a strong position in natural law:
As a child of God, I believe my rights are not derived from the Constitution. My rights are not derived from any government. My rights are not derived from any majority. My rights are because I exist. They were given to me and each of my fellow citizens by our creator and they represent the essence of human dignity.
Biden was striking this posture because Bork would have been a likely vote in overturning Roe v. Wade. That right to abortion was being treated now by the Left as a species of “natural right.” And yet, James Wilson had raised the question: If we have natural rights as human beings, when do they begin? The answer: as soon as we begin to be. Which was why, as Wilson said, the common law cast its protection over human beings “when the infant is first able to stir in the womb.”
Despite his Catholic background Joe Biden was, and remains today, a firm defender of a right to abortion. And yet, if I have those rights, “as a child of God . . . because I exist,” the child in the womb must be the bearer of those rights. How could a pregnant woman have a right then to sweep away the natural rights of the child by the simple expedient of removing, in a stroke, the bearer of those rights?
Biden’s position might have been salvaged, I guess, if he just didn’t consider the child in the womb a human being on the same plane as any other human. But if our rights do not depend on the votes of majorities, could it be that our very standing as human beings could be left in the hands of majorities, in legislatures or courts? Or worse: that the decision could be left to the woman and man who have already found an interest in killing the child?
But four years later Biden found himself delivered from his problem. He now had before his Committee, for hearings, Clarence Thomas, who was charged with the offense of taking natural law seriously at times. That new threat to Roe v. Wade marked a change of 180 degrees.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Biden warned that if we had judges again who took natural law seriously, we would have a throwback to those reactionary judges who resisted the New Deal in the 1930s, with its regulation of business. We would go back, he said, to the kinds of teachings offered by this Professor Arkes in this preposterous book, First Things.
The years would roll on and Joe Biden would settle in with the clichés offered by the Cuomos and Pelosis: He would not impose, through the laws, the “personal” “beliefs” he had absorbed through his religion. But the Church, on abortion, has never appealed to “beliefs.” The teaching has drawn on the facts of embryology, woven with principled reasoning.
Since they were moral teachings, made communal, they had never been merely “personal.” We’ve come to see the deep reluctance of bishops to challenge the leading Catholic politicians who have offered this oh-so-familiar evasion, for they don’t want those politicians charged with the offense of taking orders from their Church.
And yet, one wonders why something as simple as this may not be said: The Church would not tell the Bidens and Cuomos what to say as they make their careers in politics, but they surely would have no moral right to mislead a wide audience of Catholics about the teachings of their own Church.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Catholic Thinghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Catholic Thing2019-08-13 06:23:172019-08-13 06:27:41Joe Biden’s Adventures in the Natural Law
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues – including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform — as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. His analysis and commentary have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, Politico, Human Events, National Review Online and Townhall. Along with John Fund, he is the co-author of Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk and Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department
TOPIC…Voter ID Opponents Lose Again!!
Congressman Bob Barr represented Georgia’s 7th District in the House of Representatives. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and is Chairman of Liberty Guard a non-profit, pro-liberty organization. He also heads the Law Enforcement Education Foundation and a consulting firm, Liberty Strategies.
TOPIC…The Follow-up Speech Trump Needs to Make
Rob Natelson has divided his professional life between the private for-profit sector, the private non-profit sector, and state and local government. A former law professor and nationally known constitutional scholar, he is currently a self-employed consultant who serves as senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence at the Independence Institute in Denver.
TOPIC…Red Flag bills: Attack on the Bill of Rights!!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Conservative Commandos Radio Showhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show2019-08-13 05:34:042019-08-13 05:34:04PODCAST: Voter ID. Rep. Bob Barr: Speech Trump Needs to Make. Red Flag bills.
The political season hasn’t really even gotten into gear yet, but the political posturing and positioning certainly has — and Catholics, in particular, should be paying close attention.
First, last week, The New York Times published a pre-election analysis that pointed to the fact that millions of Americans who back in 2016 said they didn’t like [President Donald] Trump, have now changed their minds and come aboard the Trump train.
While his overall favorability rating is still below 50%, it has increased 10 points since 2016, and that news sent the loony left into a social media meltdown from which they haven’t yet recovered; some even demanding The New York Times take the story down.
Now the news — specifically Catholic — Trump won the Catholic vote in 2016 52%-48% over the wicked Hillary Clinton.
This year, it appears right now, although nothing is ever certain in politics, that Joe Biden, a Catholic — although in name only — is in the lead among the 245,000 other Democrats running for the nomination.
If he were to win, that would set up quite the clash of orthodoxies for U.S. bishops, who almost to a man hate Trump and never miss an opportunity to strike out at him to cover their own multitude of sins.
The clash would be how they could publicly get behind a Biden presidential run when Biden is an avowed, committed, never-look-back supporter of child murder.
This very topic was homed in on on Fox News last week by Martha MacCallum, a devout Catholic, during an interview with Cdl. Raymond Burke.
Burke flat-out laid it out.
[Transcript unavailable]
Not just the Catholic vote, but actual Catholic involvement in next year’s election here in the United States could be the pivotal deciding point for who wins.
It’s one reason, not the main one, but an important one nonetheless that Church Militant is retooling and equipping our studios here in Ferndale to be the source of news and information for Catholics during the upcoming campaign season.
One very important fact that has largely gone under the radar so far is the importance of Texas, once considered impenetrable by Democrats, a virtual lock for the GOP.
If the Party of Death could capture the Lone Star State in 2020, that would almost completely guarantee a defeat for Trump.
Texas has 38 Electoral College votes, absolutely critical to the Trump campaign. If Texas went blue, even by a whisker, the Democrats would seize the White House.
So how possible is it that Texas could turn? According to the phony Hispanic candidate Robert O’Rourke — who goes by the name “Beto” to pull an Elizabeth Warren on Hispanic voters — he says Texas is in play this year.
He made the claim in one of the debates a couple of weeks ago and has some history to back it up.
He came pretty darn close to upsetting Republican incumbent senator Ted Cruz in 2016, a lot closer than most people thought heading into election day.
Prior to Church Militant’s recent Strength and Honor Conference, we had an opportunity to sit down with the president of Texas Right to Life, Jim Graham, who was up for the conference.
Graham has his pulse on Texas politics perhaps better than any other person in the state, and he sees dark clouds on the political horizon.
But most troubling for Graham, and especially related to the all-important Catholic vote in Texas, which is much more so Hispanic than most other red states, he says too many of the state’s Catholic bishops are working behind the scenes for the Democrats, even down to how they personally vote.
With potentially one-third of Texas bishops, perhaps even more, actually casting votes for the Party of Death, the state must now become a focal point, perhaps more than any other in the country, when assessing Trump’s re-election campaign and the Catholic vote.
Cardinal Burke has been down this road before. In 2004, as archbishop of St. Louis, he created a major controversy when he said then-Democratic presidential candidate, Catholic-in-name-only John Kerry, could not receive Holy Communion owing to his obstinate support of abortion.
Burke was plotted against by serial homopredator Theodore McCarrick and Donald Wuerl, who covered up for and lied about McCarrick’s filth, something he still does to this day.
McCarrick lied to the bishops, with Wuerl’s knowledge, about a Vatican answer to the U.S. bishops question about whether Holy Communion should be denied to pro-abort Catholic politicians.
The Vatican had answered in the affirmative, saying, yes, such child killers were not to be admitted to Holy Communion.
But McCarrick, who was still sexually assaulting seminarians in the Jersey Shore beach house, simply lied and said the Vatican has said no, it was OK for them to receive.
He had deliberately quoted from an only semi-related footnote, which made it appear it was OK, but the footnote had nothing to do with the question about actual pro-abort politician themselves.
Regarding them specifically, the Vatican’s Cdl. Joseph Ratzinger, who wrote the decision for the U.S. bishops, has flat-out, unambiguously declared, no they cannot receive.
So when Cdl. Burke goes on Fox News and says Biden should not be given Holy Communion, he’s right. This all matters, both spiritually and politically.
The positions of the Luciferian Left, like their father, are all built on lies, be those lies political or theological.
The father of lies has been actively trying to corrupt the Catholic Church since the days of Our Lord’s earthly mission — remember Judas. In that regard, only the cast of characters has changed, not the war itself.
Much is at stake next year, mostly the truth, and Catholics can expect a major assault against the truths of the Church not only around the nation, but squarely in Texas, and like the case with McCarrick and Wuerl and the rest of them, they can expect the assault to come from various Catholic prelates.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-08-12 13:37:202019-08-12 13:39:43VIDEO: The Vortex — Catholic AND Democrat? Not possible.
“It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.” – Mark Twain
“Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.” – Mark Twain
On August 8th, 2019 Democratic Party presidential candidate Joe Biden said at a small campaign rally in Iowa, “We choose truth over facts.”
It is important to understand that the Democratic Party has been choosing truth over facts for some time. The Democratic Party has come to accept these truths as facts.
The idea of saying what one believes to be true regardless of the facts is now common place within the Democratic Party. Let’s look at just thirteen beliefs that the Democratic Party has embraced that validate what Joe Biden said.
Here is our list Democratic Truths (D-Truth) vs. Fact:
D-Truth: a person can choose their sex. Fact: there are only two sexes, male (XY) and female (XX).
D-Truth: the world is going to end in 10 years. Fact: no one, other than God, knows when the world will end.
D-Truth: Mankind can change the climate (weather) by passing laws. Facts: The climate changes, these changes follow natural cycles, there is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.
D-Truth: Socialism works. Fact: there are no examples in history where socialism has work. Socialism has led to mass starvation and death wherever it has been tried.
D-Truth: Guns kill people. Fact: people kill people using a variety of weapons, the most common being a knife.
D-Truth: Government redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor ends poverty. Fact: See #4 above.
D-Truth: Giving special rights to certain groups under the ideal of social justice is a sign of tolerance. Fact: Giving all people equal protection under the law is justice.
D-Truth: Giving government welfare to non-citizens over citizens is good public policy. Fact: Welfare causes dependence and is paid for by taxing working class citizens.
D-Truth: The federal government must take more control of everything. Fact: Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution only gives the federal government “the power to coin money, to regulate commerce, to declare war, to raise and maintain armed forces, and to establish a Post Office.”
D-Truth: We must pay reparations to blacks for past injustices. Fact: The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, known collectively as the Civil War Amendments, passed to ensure equality for recently emancipated slaves. The 13th Amendment banned slavery and all involuntary servitude, except in the case of punishment for a crime.
D-Truth: Abortion, up to birth, is a woman’s right. Fact: Abortion, up to birth, is murder and denies the unborn infant its due process rights under the U.S. Constitution.
D-Truth: Elected officials know what is best for their constituents. Fact: God knows what is best as written in the Ten Commandments (Genesis 2:1–2 and Exodus 31:17) and the Golden Rule (Matthew 7:12).
D-Truth: Time to fight for “democracy.” Fact: America is a Constitutional Republic. John Adams wrote, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”
If you have other Democratic truths vs. facts for comparison please leave them in the comments section below. We will add it to our list.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-08-11 14:15:082019-08-18 06:52:2613 Democratic Party beliefs that validate Joe Biden’s, ‘We choose truth over facts’
Thank goodness people are waking up all over the world. But sadly, and especially in America, many are beyond asleep at the wheel. You know, the lights are on but nobody’s home. The regurgitating robotic hypnotic flock are in a trance. Programmed by design and unbeknownst to them. Yes, they live and walk among us. They are a danger to themselves and to us all. They are a threat to this movement to resurrect and save America.
The Methods of the Culprits
There are many means by which they have seized control over the many, thus creating an obedient robotic hypnotic flock. Usurping the education system. Mass media and fake news. Censorship. Evil blatant liars and lunatics. Deceptive evil opinion leaders. Hollywood and the music industry. Then of course far too many are on prescribed medications and this includes psychotropic drugs as well. Then there is the onslaught of electromagnetic frequencies from multiple sources and entrainment.
What If?
What if people could not see that their President is exposing evil and saving America and re-directing humanity? What if people could not see that President Trump may go down as one of the greatest Presidents in modern history? What if people began to realize that the news media is rigged and the majority of information are outright lies? What if people began supporting infanticide? What if people could not see that Big Pharma creates returning customers and not cures? What if people were encouraged to take deadly vaccines soon to be mandated? What if a film industry produced a film about killing deplorables? What if the U.S. Constitution was no longer applicable? What if the United States began to resemble an oligarchy? What if people did not realize that the majority of these mass shootings and terrorist attacks are in fact false flags? What if a President could bypass Congress and declare war on his or her own? What if the government could read your emails and texts without a search warrant, or monitor and control your calls, purchases, Internet searches, social media postings, and essentially every move in your life? What if the President could kill you without warning? What if people were so blind they will not believe the truth, (Q) but rather the lies?
What if a private bank seized control over the issuance of a country’s money supply? What if U.S. Supreme Court justices referred to previous justices rather than the U.S. Constitution? What if the states were no longer sovereign states? What if your government did not protect its language, borders, and culture? What if the nation, due to bad trade policy and poor budget management, created an unsustainable debt exceeding $22 trillion? What if a nation started unfounded wars costing the lives of millions and costing the taxpayers trillions without ever “winning”? What if a nation’s veterans were unable to receive adequate health care upon returning from the battlefield? What if you needed a license to speak, assemble, or protest against the government? What if the right to keep and bear arms belonged only to the government? What if we no longer had a free press? What if the U.S. allowed hundreds of billions of dollars in trade deficits with foreign nations each and every year? What if a nation created a 24 percent unemployment level and lied to the people, stating that it was only 5 percent? What if our health-care system was out of control, expensive, and about to implode? What if the U.S. Constitution was no longer the supreme law of the land and Islamic Sharia Law began to take over? What if your right to free speech was silenced via political correctness and censorship?
What if the education system costs were among the highest in the world, yet among the lowest in scores? What if a college graduate has $50,000 to $100,000 in debt and cannot find a job? What if the two-party system is a fraud and is bought and controlled, giving you the illusion you have a say in the process? What if your candidates for office are lifelong criminals and lifelong corrupt, career politicians? What if the candidates were controlled and selected, not elected? What if almost everything you knew to be true is a big fat lie? What if you were responsible for leaving behind a dangerous world void of freedom and opportunity for your children and grandchildren? What if the once greatest and most revered nation on earth was a breath away from losing its freedom and sovereignty to a New World Order?
“We now live in a nation where doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, the press destroys information, religion destroys morals, and banks destroy the economy.” – Chris Hedges
Conclusion
A raised understanding is needed as to the realization that a major paradigm shift is under way and that we have been living in a web of deceitful lies designed to entrap us and move us away from the spirit and more towards vanity and worldly possessions as we march blindly like useless idiots down the road to serfdom. The opposite of love is not hate, it is fear. So, choose love. As you obtain more and more truths, then take the correct steps in implementing change, the fear subsides.
Many of us have become a part of what I call the robotic hypnotic flock. Ignorant followers, so to speak. Now, being a follower is a good thing as most of us are not leaders, yet we rely on leadership. When being a follower, be a wise and discerning one and not an ignorant one. Be aware of who or what ideology you are following and ask yourself if this is pro-survival with the greatest benefit to the many without hurting the one. Then proceed. The world today, in my opinion has a true leader at the helm. That man is Donald J. Trump.
We are indeed living in the age of an increasing number of smarter phones and an increasing number of dumbed down people. Isaac Asimov once said, “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.” By and large, his quote is so true today.
Technology has advanced and continues to advance rapidly, and we have the technology today to solve many of the critical issues facing mankind and the planet from air to water to food and not just for some, but for all. For each and every one of us. You know we can put an end to starvation, then one must ask why we haven’t. Children are starving to death every day and all we do is change the channel or surf another website. Something is very wrong.
The trouble is the systems and institutions such as central banks and the debt based monetary and economic systems; governments, the media, international bankers, corporations, Hollywood, the medical industry (“Big Pharma”), secret societies, religions, and others which are preventing forward progress in exchange for both profit and control are again using a world of betrayal after trust while utilizing very clever deceptive techniques.
I’m afraid the stakes are quite high. I believe the decisions that we make right here, right now, will determine how we live out the rest of our lives and beyond. We must all decide, as we are all responsible. It’s become a slogan to sell some corporate merchandise, but I think Gandhi intended these words for a much higher purpose when he said, “Be the change that you wish to see in the world.” So naturally it’s up to you, me, each and every one of us. We must begin with the man (woman) in the mirror.
Ultimately, I am a long-term optimist but a short-term realist. I believe that love conquers all and the light will shine, expose the evil, and overcome the darkness. However, I also feel we are living in a time where being a flippant, eternal optimist or the doom and gloom pessimist is not the most effective position to take. In fact, I believe that being a flippant optimist in the face of the harsh realities of the day can get you, and perhaps others around you, killed. In times like these there is nothing smart nor cool about being a short- term optimist; don’t buy it. Neither is denial or burying our heads in the sand. We might consider starting out by being a realist. Observe the obvious, trust but verify, practice critical thinking, question authority, question everything, and think for yourself. Surround yourself with people of like-mind who do indeed truly understand the times in which we live and expand those circles of relationships. Subscribe to my weekly report below.
Being a realist can be challenging as one must first be able to recognize truth from something other than truth and this can be difficult as we are living in a bubble, a falsely created reality, a contrived and controlled world, strewn with lie after lie, concealed truths, half-truths and biased vested interest for selfish gain and to assert control over the free-will of others. I mean, after all, they take our space and make it small, they stamp out free-will, and keep us tied and bound. They direct our attention and control our minds for their evil deeds. Well, a new day has come and so this shall perish from the earth. You are not alone. We are never alone.
The challenges we all face are enormous but the scales are tipping. This is our time; we have a chance. The time for action is now. You are nothing more than an accomplice should you stand by idly as the culture and planet declines rapidly into a very, very unpleasant condition. With this quick read e-book, it is my hope that we begin to come to realize these misconceptions and begin the much needed course corrections, both personally and collectively. Thank goodness many are awakening.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00John Michael Chambershttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJohn Michael Chambers2019-08-11 07:20:202019-08-11 07:23:36Robotic Hypnotic Flock
We must confront the reality that “cancellation” of student loan debt may successfully serve a political campaign promise, but it fails as serious policy.
America’s polarized political system is ripe for radical ideas. Democratic political systems are based on the notion that politicians must find ways to appeal to voters. As the demographics of a population change, the types of political offerings change. Currently, a growing trend within the Democratic Party is to offer younger voters reforms to the student loan debt situation.
Crisis or Not?
The student loan debt “crisis” has been perpetuated by the myth that one’s best shot—perhaps only shot—at achieving success in life is to have a college degree. One of the long-term benefits of a degree in our skills-based economy is the opportunity to earn more than an individual with a high school diploma or less.
As Daniel Kowalski notes, government helped fuel this demand for higher education. Between 1980 and 2016, the number of higher education institutions increased from 3,231 to 4,360.
As Kowalski writes,
the government’s backing of student loans has caused the price of higher education to artificially rise; the demand would not be so high if college were not a financially viable option for some.
Since the 1980s, costs of education have surged eight times faster than wages. Unsurprisingly, a loan for $100,000 for a degree that may lead to a job with an annual salary of $40,000 per year is financially challenging.
Like other areas of government intervention, the government’s infiltration of student loan markets has produced unexpected trade-offs.
Is There a Solution?
Remarkably, leading Democratic contenders for the 2020 presidential nomination like Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth have argued that the solution is to “cancel” outstanding student debt, currently totaling $1.6 trillion.
As some scholars, such as Cato’s Corey A. DeAngelis, have pointed out, there is no way to “cancel” these debts. The debt burden would merely be shifted to people who didn’t agree to take out these loans.
These plans have been described, quite fairly, as a “bailout for the elite, as the top 25 percent of households by income hold almost half of all student debt.”
The plans should be described for what really are: an effort to “buy” the votes of student loan debt holders, predominantly younger voters. According to USA Today, “forty-three percent of young voters, ages 18 to 29, surveyed said they are likely to participate in the nominating contests” in 2020. Comically, even Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, has said, “I wish—if I was a magic genie and could give that [free four-year college] to everyone and we could afford it, I would.”
Our current political discourse requires some grounding and perspective, as policymakers are right to note that student loan debt has larger implications on the economy writ-large. Given that Senator Warren’s plan is financially dubious and impractical on its face, it is worthwhile to explore alternative ventures this $1.6 trillion could support. That amount of money could:
Give each of Los Angeles county’s 59,000 homeless residents roughly $27 million
Buy every resident of New Jersey a $175,000 yacht
Give each of the United States’ roughly 40,000 homeless veterans around $40 million
Some or all of these things may be desirable. Yet to pursue them would ignore basic economic realities, including our growing federal debt. The United States currently owes around $22.5 trillion, a figure projected to rise over the next decade. There must be a concerted effort by members of Congress to address our national debt if we are to avoid a financial reckoning.
In the meantime, politicians ought to look for more grounded ideas to reform the student loan situation:
Legislators can amend or remove the provision of federal law that exempts student loans from being discharged during bankruptcy.
Thought leaders can promote trades and apprentice programs that will benefit young people in the current job market. (Some companies have promoted their efforts to hire individuals without degrees due to the tight labor market.)
Policymakers can continue to promote relationships between online educational tools and higher education institutions.
At The Wall Street Journal, Joseph Weinstein recommends that policymakers should reduce the salaries of university presidents and administrators.
We can all work to debunk the myth that a university diploma grants a specific status in civil society.
Providing the wholesale cancellation of student loan debt may comfort those affected in the near-term. However, it does not address the underlying ills of our ways. Instead, we ought to look at the flaws in the government takeover of the student loan market and how it has artificially increased the cost of college attendance.
This fact may evade the bartering politicians, but it should not evade the average voter. We must confront the reality that the cancellation of student loan debt may successfully serve a political campaign promise, but it fails as serious policy.
Mitchell Nemeth holds a Master in the Study of Law from the University of Georgia School of Law. His work has been featured at The Arch Conservative, Merion West, and The Red & Black. Mitchell founded the Young Americans for Liberty chapter at the University of Georgia.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2019-08-10 20:27:192019-08-10 20:29:21There Is No Way to “Cancel” Student Loan Debt
The next day after the horrific El Paso and Dayton shootings, I boycotted media. As expected, Democrats and fake news media were despicably giddy, thrilled for another opportunity to push for disarming law-abiding gun owners and falsely demonize Trump and his supporters. I boycotted media because was I could not stomach wimpy Republicans and never-Trumpers running to microphones to surrender to anti-American leftists’ spin of the facts. I thought, “I am not going to allow cowards supposedly on our side to raise my blood pressure.”
Case in point is John Kasich who ran to CNN microphones to further the insidious lie that Trump is responsible for the shootings. What is wrong with Kasich and why does he call himself a Republican?
Some on our side do not comprehend that Democrats and fake news media are not interested in truth and fairness. Attempting to play-nice with these anti-American progressives is insane. Progressives are like unruly children. They must be firmly told no and sent to their rooms. Progressives must be defeated.
Allowing progressives to dominate public education, social media, fake news media and entertainment media has gotten us into this mess. Christian churches abandoned God’s command to be salt by foolishly staying out of politics. Consequently, we are one election away from transformation into a socialist country in which debauchery is government mandated.
The Democrat party has become a cesspool of pure evil and anti-Americanism. Their demonic behavior is expected. It is upsetting when people on our side surrender to Democrats’ false premises rather than staying on offense and strongly pushing back with the truth.
Thank God for Donald J. Trump. In the face of progressives and Washington DC elites demanding that he back off, Trump nailed Democrat Elijah Cummings by exposing his terrible district in Baltimore.
Progressives’ and elite’s heads exploded in response to Trump boldly asking, what happened to the 16 billion federal dollars sent to Baltimore to fix Cummings’ hellhole district? You gotta love Trump.
Progressives immediately tried to silence Trump by calling him a racist. Silly “wabbits”. The facts are on Trump’s side, confirming he is not a racist. Trump’s history is filled with hiring and launching the careers of blacks. Upon opening Mar-a-Lago, his club in Palm Beach, Trump insisted that Blacks and Jews be accepted while other clubs sought to keep blacks and Jews out. Allow me to remind you that black unemployment has plunged to historic lows thanks to president Trump. Trump also implemented prison reform which greatly benefits blacks.
Where are the old-school Americans with backbone willing to boldly tell progressives, “No!”? My late mom was such an American.
Starting in pre-k, kids are encouraged to experiment with homosexuality and dangerous sex; anal sex, asphyxiation, oral sex, BDSM, gender bending and rimming. While it is encouraging that parents have finally begun pushing back, where is the righteous anger expressed by parents, Christians and the general public?
For crying out loud, progressive schools are aggressively pushing to legally help kids change their sex without parental consent. How in the name of all things righteous have we declined to such insanity becoming reality?
My late mom was a 5 foot, stout and dark-complexioned black woman who was raised in the extremely tough ghetto of Baltimore. If the LGBTQ curriculum was taught when I was in elementary school, my righteously enraged mom would have marched down to my school. She would storm into the principal’s office and ask, “Are you n*****s crazy? How dare you take it upon yourselves to teach my nine-months such sinful garbage!”
Today, we walk on eggshells, afraid to anger or offend progressive bullies while they cram their Godless agenda down our throats. Frankly, I am sick of it.
Democrats and fake news media are using their absurd lie that Trump and his supporters are white supremacists as the centerpiece of their campaign to win the White House in 2020. We have no idea how many deceived voters will believe these anti-American progressives’ outrageous lie.
The solution is that we boldly push back, push back and push back with righteousness, truth and action. Each of us must do whatever we can to inform voters and insure Trump’s reelection. Use whatever gifts, talents and resources God has given you to fight evil and save our country.
September 7th in Maryland, singers from across America will gather to record my new Trump Train 2020 song. Interested singers may contact me at: mr_lloydmarcus@hotmail.com
“All that is needed for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke
As we go forth in battle against progressives’ violence and evil, may you be strengthened by this scripture. “Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the Lord.” Jeremiah 1:8
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Lloyd Marcushttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLloyd Marcus2019-08-10 16:44:102019-08-10 16:44:10Resurgence of Old-school Courageous Americans
