Posts Tagged ‘Ronald Reagan’

O’Reilly Begs Trump, Rush: “Fox Jilted at the Altar”

January 28, 2016

republican_debate_ben_garrisonUnder the category “Actions Have Consequences”…

Thehill.com reports that

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Wednesday night lashed out at Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly in his first appearance on the network since he announced he’d boycott the next GOP debate.
 
He also refused to reconsider his decision to sit out the network’s Thursday night debate – the last before the Iowa caucuses in five days – and said he’d move forward with his own competing event to raise money for wounded veterans.

Speaking on “The O’Reilly Factor,” Trump continued his long-running feud with Kelly, who he has been criticizing ever since she challenged him on his past derogatory remarks about women at the first GOP debate in August. 

“I have zero respect for Megyn Kelly,” Trump said. “I don’t think she’s good at what she does and I think she’s highly overrated. And frankly, she’s a moderator; I thought her question last time was ridiculous.”
 
Kelly is also set to moderate Thursday night’s debate on Fox News.
 
Trump is instead holding a rally in Des Moines at the same time as the Republican debate that he says will raise money for wounded veterans.

In the contentious interview with O’Reilly, Trump rebuffed the anchor’s attempts to convince him that he’s making a grave error by skipping the debate.
 
“I believe personally that you want to improve the country,” O’Reilly said. “By doing this, you miss the opportunity to convince others … that is true.
 
“You have in this debate format the upper hand — you have sixty seconds off the top to tell the moderator, ‘You’re a pinhead, you’re off the mark and here’s what I want to say’. By walking away from it, you lose the opportunity to persuade people you are a strong leader.”
 
But O’Reilly’s pitch fell flat with Trump. The GOP front-runner dug in his heels, insisting he intended to retaliate against the network by depriving them of ratings.
 
“Fox was going to make a fortune off this debate,” Trump said. “Now they’re going to make much less.”
 
O’Reilly said he was merely trying to convince Trump that his approach “is wrong because it’s better for people to see you in the debate format.”
 
He gave the example from 2012, when former Speaker Newt Gingrich was asked an embarrassing question by a CNN debate moderator at a South Carolina debate about allegations he had an open marriage.
 
Gingrich shut the moderator down and went on to win South Carolina, O’Reilly noted.
 
“That’s the kind of guy you are,” O’Reilly said. “You stick it to them and let them have it.”

 Responded Trump: “Newt is a friend of mine and I thought it was an unfair question. But equally unfair was the question Megyn Kelly asked me.”
 
O’Reilly then sought to appeal to Trump’s capacity to forgive, reminding the billionaire businessman that he’s a Christian, even if he doesn’t attend church all that often, and that the Bible says to “turn the other cheek.”
 
Trump shot back, saying he’s a regular church-goer, and that the Bible also says “an eye for an eye.”
 
“You could look at it that way too,” Trump said.
 
O’Reilly accused Trump of being “petty,” and said he was allowing things that are out of his control to have outsized influence over his decision-making process.
 
“I don’t like being taken advantage of,” Trump said. “In this case I was being taken advantage of by Fox. I don’t like that. Now when I’m representing the country, if I win, I’m not going to let our country be taken advantage of. … It’s a personality trait but I don’t think it’s a bad personality trait.”
 
O’Reilly ended the interview asking Trump to just at least consider showing up Thursday night. Trump said the two had agreed beforehand that O’Reilly not ask that question.
 
“I told you up front don’t ask me that question because it’s an embarrassing question for you and I don’t want to embarrass you,” he said.

Bill-O asked the question because his employers are desperate.

Fox News Host Greta Van Susteren posted a Viewer Poll in which she asked if folks would watch tonight’s Republican Primary Debate, if Donald J. Trump followed through with his promise not to show up.

As of the morning of the debate, 86.91% of those who responded will not be watching a “Trump-less” Debate.

Rush Limbaugh, as I reported yesterday, has been on point during this whole kerfuffle.

Once again, he made a couple of spot-on observations on yesterday’s radio program:

Observation #1 –

Folks, I want to let you in on another observation of mine — and that’s all it is, is an observation.  I have found, when talking to people, including media people in the East Coast, New York — well, all the way up and down the East Coast, but New York — Washington, Boston, down here in south Florida and so forth, virtually everybody thinks of Fox News as a conservative network.  But you go out… As I’ve traveled around and go places… Like for the holidays, I see people in Missouri. For Christmas, I see people all over the place. When I golf, I see people all over the country.

And I’m here to tell you: Fox News is not considered the conservative network that it used to be.  I’m not trying to stir anything up here.  I’m saying that when you hear the media, who are all leftists, talk about Fox News, it may as well be the John Birch Society as far as they’re concerned.  That’s why they hate it.  It may as well be the Birchers. It may as well be whatever evil right-wing organization. That’s what they think it is.  But you go out to the heartland of this country, and it’s not so much.  “I mean, what would a conservative network be doing giving time to Michael Moore? 

“Why would New York Times and Washington Post reporters be on the air to give opinions on a conservative network?” This is what people are saying out there that I hear.  Now, the identity is still pretty obviously heavily tilted to news and analysis that you don’t get anywhere else, and that remains true.  I’m just telling you people’s perceptions as they share them with me. I’ll tell you what I think, ’cause I find it amazing.  It’s just more evidence of the media being out of touch and not really knowing what people say.

Since we’re talking about Iowa, I don’t think they really know what’s important to the people of Iowa.  Because they look at everything through their own prism of being in the Northeast and part of the liberal power structure that determines every social, political structure in that part of the country — and, as such, there’s a divide.  And it’s not just among elected officials.  I speak constantly about the disconnect that exists now between elected officials and the people, Republican and Democrat.

The distances, the disconnect between the people who vote for them and the people that serve in office is bigger than I’ve ever seen it.  And it’s no more obvious than the issue of immigration.  But it’s also obvious on the issue of say, Obamacare, or spending.  And when you start talking about Fox News, people in the media say, “Oh, it’s just embarrassing. Right wing! My God, ugh.”  But it’s not thought of that way in many parts of the country.  

Observation #2 –

You’ve heard the phrase “the game.”  Every business has aspects of it that are considered the game, and that’s the routine.  And the game is characterized by everybody knowing the rules of the game.  People involved in it play by the rules.  Some venture outside now and then, but the rules pretty much of the game are adhered to because it’s a matter of respect for the game in which everybody is in. 

And in this business one of the games is that when the media calls, you answer, and when the media wants you, you go, and when the media is going to host a debate and it’s part of a Republican presidential campaign, you go.  You just do it, no matter what the media’s done to you in the past, no matter what you think of it, whether you want to go or not, you go.  That’s the game. 

Trump is so far outside this game, he’s so far outside the rules, he’s never been a player in this game.  He’s always been an outsider.  I heard people on Fox last night talking about this. “Who does he think he is?  He can’t control the media.”  I got news for you:  He is controlling the media, and it’s his objective.  He is controlling the media.  He controls the media when he’s not on it.  He controls the media when he is on it.  He controls the media when he’s asleep.  Nobody else has been able to do anything like this short of the Kennedys, and they’re pikers compared to the way Trump is doing this. 

Now, it’s very simple, if you read The Art of the Deal or if you know Donald Trump at all, it’s very simple:  He had an unpleasant experience in the first debate, and in his mind, the question that he was asked was rigged.  Don’t forget, before that first debate, remember all of the news stories that were floating around saying that that debate, somebody at Fox had been given orders by the Republican establishment to take Trump out.  Remember that?  There were any number of so-called sources for this.  Some said it was the donors demanding it.  Some said that it was Fox News executives demanding it.  Some said it was the RNC demanding it. 

Well, Trump’s not immune.  He hears it.  And even if he hadn’t heard it he would have to know that they want to take him out; he’s outside the game; he’s breaking all the rules.  He’s exposing so much as fraud that has gone on inside the American political process for so long they can’t allow somebody like this to win and succeed.  It’s quite natural they would want to take him out as well.  It’s Bengals-Steelers time here, folks.  It’s quite natural they’d want to take him out.  Well, he heard it.

Here comes Megyn Kelly’s first question.  He didn’t hear anybody else get a question like that.  He never sees Hillary Clinton get a question like that.  He never hears Bill Clinton or another Democrat get a question like that.  So he answers it and says screw this.  I’m not putting myself in that position again.  Why should I?  I don’t have to. 

But the rules of the game say when there’s a debate, you show up.  Screw the rules, he’s saying.  Why should I willingly give them another shot at me in a circumstance they control, why should I do it?  What’s the sense in it for me?  I’m leading; I’m running the pack here; why in the world should I put myself in that circumstance?  I’ve already seen what’s gonna happen. 

I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that.  I mean, there could be some personal things going on here that I don’t know about.  But just from the standpoint of knowing Trump, reading his book, and seeing how he operates elsewhere, in his mind, screw the rules, screw what’s expected, screw “This is just the way you do it.”  I’m not gonna put myself in a position go where I’m gonna be treated unfairly.  I don’t have to.  I’m Donald Trump.  Anybody can do this.  Ted Cruz could choose to do it if he wants to.  They just don’t.  Cruz and the rest of the pack are playing the rules of the game.  Trump is saying I don’t have to do it.  I don’t want to do it.  I don’t have any respect for these people.  What the hell. 

In addition to that, Donald Trump knows that by not showing up, he’s owning the entire event.  Some guy not even present will end up owning the entire event, and the proof of that is Fox News last night.  I have to tell you, folks, this is where this gets tough for me.  I was stunned watching Fox News last night.  Fox News was acting like they had been jilted at the altar.  If it had been me — and this is easy to say — if it had been me and Donald Trump makes a big to-do about not showing up for the debate, report the story and move on.  Talk about Ted Cruz.  Go talk about the other candidates.  Go talk about Hillary and the FBI.  There’s a lot of news out there.  But don’t devote the rest of the night to how a candidate’s not showing up because of you.  I mean, the network, not just Megyn Kelly. 

Look, I understand the warfare that has been established here.  If you look at some of the things that Trump’s campaign spokesman, Corey Lewandowski has said, if you read between the lines, it looks like what really has ticked ’em off over at Trump central is the mocking of Trump in the official PR statements that Fox has released, making fun, they’re gonna call Putin, they’re gonna call in the ayatollah, and the ayatollah and Putin, whatever.  That might have been the nail in the coffin as opposed to any lack of desire to face Megyn Kelly. But folks, one other thing about this.  If I heard it once last night, I’ve heard it a thousand times since, that Trump is afraid of Megyn Kelly or afraid of Fox News.  That is not what this is.  There isn’t any fear.  What is there is here — in my opinion — is a desire to control this and a purposeful decision to not put himself in a circumstance where other people want to make him look bad. 

In his mind, that’s a dumb thing to do.  You don’t put yourself in a circumstance where a whole bunch of other people are gonna be able to make you look bad while you’re there.  If they do it when you’re not around, that’s another thing, you can counterprogram it, you can do whatever, but you don’t have to put yourself in a circumstance where you have to personally deal with it as a sign of disrespect or somebody else trying to notch their belt.  It really isn’t any more complicated than that. 

Exactly.

It was a sound business decision. He was protecting his “brand”. The “Business of Today’s Politics” decrees that you jump when the Elite of your Political Party and their minions in the Media tell you to. That is the game to which Rush was referring.

The problem that the Republican Elite and the Media are having with Trump is the simple fact that he is a Businessman. He is not a Professional Politician. Trump knew that he was walking into a trap. So, he made the decision not to. It was a sound Business Decision. He was protecting his “brand”, while at the same time, once again owning the News Cycle.

Additionally, through appearing on behalf of the Iowa Veterans, he is solidifying his Populist Image.

Another Republican Presidential Hopeful, back in the 1980s, decided to skip the last Primary Debate before the Iowa Caucus. He lost Iowa, but he won the Presidency in a landslide.

He did alright.

Ratings-wise, Fox News, if Trump goes through with his plans, will be hoisted on their own petard.

My degree is in Radio, Television, and Film. And, let me tell you, boys and girls, in television, even now, almost 36 years after I graduated college, high viewership ratings remain the Cash Cow of the Television Industry.

Their business depends on it.

In this situation, those who run Fox News decided to send their Cash Cow to the slaughterhouse and then hold a barbeque.

As a result of their actions, I predict that they will experience a bad case of gas tonight.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Trump, Fox News, the Democrat Elite, and “The Art of the Deal”

January 27, 2016

Oval-Office-Trump-ArtOfTheDealLeading Republican Presidential Primary Candidate, Donald J. Trump, was at the top of the News Cycle all day, yesterday.

I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

Eight hours ago, as of this posting, the Presidential Campaign Office of Donald J. Trump issued the following statement on his Official Faceboo Account…

(New York, NY) January 26th, 2016 – As someone who wrote one of the best-selling business books of all time, The Art of the Deal, who has built an incredible company, including some of the most valuable and iconic assets in the world, and as someone who has a personal net worth of many billions of dollars, Mr. Trump knows a bad deal when he sees one. FOX News is making tens of millions of dollars on debates, and setting ratings records (the highest in history), where as in previous years they were low-rated afterthoughts.

Unlike the very stupid, highly incompetent people running our country into the ground, Mr. Trump knows when to walk away. Roger Ailes and FOX News think they can toy with him, but Mr. Trump doesn’t play games. There have already been six debates, and according to all online debate polls including Drudge, Slate, Time Magazine, and many others, Mr. Trump has won all of them, in particular the last one. Whereas he has always been a job creator and not a debater, he nevertheless truly enjoys the debating process – and it has been very good for him, both in polls and popularity.

He will not be participating in the FOX News debate and will instead host an event in Iowa to raise money for the Veterans and Wounded Warriors, who have been treated so horribly by our all talk, no action politicians. Like running for office as an extremely successful person, this takes guts and it is the kind mentality our country needs in order to Make America Great Again.

Yesterday, Trump also said the following in an interview with Mike Barnicle on the seldom-watched cable news channel, MSNBC

Well, I think that I’m going to be able to get along with Pelosi. I think I’m going to be able to — I’ve always had a good relationship with Nancy Pelosi. I’ve never had a problem. Reid will be gone. I always had a decent relationship with Reid, although lately, obciosuly, I haven’t been dealing with him so he’ll actually use my name as the ultimate — you know, as the ultimate of the billionaires in terms of, you know, people you don’t want.

But I always had a great relationship with Harry Reid. And frankly, if I weren’t running for office I would be able to deal with her or Reid or anybody. But I think I’d be able to get along very well with Nancy Pelosi and just about everybody.

Hey, look, I think I’ll be able to get along well with Chuck Schumer. I was always very good with Schumer. I was close to Schumer in many ways. It’s important that you get along. It’s wonderful to say you’re a maverick and you’re going to stand up and close up the country and all of the things, but you have to get somebody to go along with you. You have a lot of people. We have a system. The founders created the system that actually is a very good system. It does work, but it can’t work if you can get nobody to go along with you.

When word came out, my fellow Conservatives made the following  points that

  1. If Trump can’t stand up to Meghan Kelly, how is he going to stand up to Putin and the rest of our enemies?
  2. 2. Who the heck wants to get along with Pelosi, Reid, and Schumer? The next President needs to politically destroy them!

Why did Trump tell Fox News to buzz off?

Why is he talking about “getting along” with the Democrat Elite?

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, gave a superb analysis of the way Trump operates, on his nationally-syndicated Program, yesterday…

Let me share with you some analysis that will no doubt be misunderstood and distorted in many places in our media, but here we go.  As I’m listening to Trump talk about all this — and not just today. It is fascinating, is it not, that Donald Trump has sort of reframed, or maybe even redefined, the purpose and the position of the presidency as something defined by negotiating deals?  He talks about this all the time. This is important. He’s credibly presenting himself as a skilled dealmaker, as a skilled negotiator.  Therefore, he is positing here that the job of president, to him, is negotiating and dealmaking, foreign and domestic. 

Trade equals deals. Foreign policy equals deals such as Iran, the entire Middle East.  Domestic policy equals deals, i.e., making them with Democrats.  By all those deals… Here’s the thing: Every time Trump talks about doing a deal — with Mexico and the wall, you name it, with the ChiComs. Every time he talks about doing deals, he talks about winning them for his position, that nobody else is any good at this, that the people running our government now, elected officials now don’t know how to do deals. They do the dumbest deals ever. 

But Trump is gonna do smart deals, because that’s what his life is. 

He does deals for everything, and he runs rings around everybody. 

He wrote a book on how to do deals better than anybody else.  Even after telling everybody how to do deals, they still can’t do ’em better than he does.  And he’s defined all of this as pro-America, i.e., for the people. Making America great again.  The opposition, or the opposite reactions to Trump among Republicans and others depends on whether people trust or believe him or not.  Trump opposers don’t believe it; Trump supporters do believe it.  He thinks he can make deals with Russia and Putin better than Obama, everybody think is so that’s he’s repositioning everything here as he’s a dealmaker and Cruz can’t do deals because everybody hates him.

Okay.  Let’s talk about deal-making here for a minute.  Just a quick minute or two.  When you are in business, let’s say you’re J.R. Ewing and you’re up against the cartel in Dallas, and you’re making deals, those are businesses deals.  Any kind of a business deal.  The experts who teach business school students how to do deals, the best deals are those in which everybody at the end feels good. The Art of the Deal in business is making sure that you get what you want while making the other side think they got enough of what they want that they’re happy, too.  That in business it’s a bad thing to skunk somebody and leave them with nothing.  Give ’em something, no matter what cards you hold, and if you go into the deal holding none of the cards, the objective is, both sides like it and both sides don’t.  If there’s commonality, if both sides are unhappy they didn’t get it all, fine.  If both sides are happy with what they get to one degree or another, then you got a good deal, an okay deal, and you’re out of there. 

In politics, that’s not how it works.  Take a look at the deals the Republicans have done with the Democrats and ask yourself, in every one of them, be it a budget deal, be it an immigration deal, is there any, is there a single deal that the Republicans have made in the past seven years that any of you have felt, “You know what, we got something out of this?”  No. However, if you listen to the Republicans who participated in the negotiation of the deal, they universally come out of there and start telling us, “Hey, you know, we got some stuff in here that we didn’t have. And out of the budget deal you know what that was?  We won back the right to export oil.  We smoked ’em.  We got a great deal.”  And you’re saying, “You think that makes this a good deal?” 

So from the Republican establishment standpoint, they think you will be made to believe that they made a good deal if they tout what they think they got out of it.  The Democrats, when they go into one of these deals, it’s smoke city.  There isn’t going to be one iota’s compromise.  The Republicans aren’t gonna get anything that matters. 

Now, the Democrats might give them something inconsequential, just enough that the Republicans can leave the negotiation and say, “Look what we got, look what we got here, we did okay.”  And their voters are saying, “You got skunked, you got nothing, we lost it again, and what you promised to do is kick it down the road and we’ll deal with it next time.  It keeps happening and happening.  We didn’t get diddly-squat.” 

“Yeah, we did, look at Medicare Part B!  We skunked ’em, we got a brand-new entitlement that’s got conservative free market principles all over.”  You think that was a win?  That’s what we were told after that happened.  How in the world can you, with a Republican administration, Republican House, agree to a new entitlement, it’s your idea for a new entitlement.  And they dare come out and tell us that that’s a win? 

But in Trump’s world, where he does deals, he’s gonna have to do business with ’em down the road.  He doesn’t want to make enemies like he says Ted Cruz does.  Ted Cruz is not nasty.  You know, this is the thing.  I have warned them about this I don’t know how many times.  Ted Cruz is not nasty.  (imitating Trump) “He’s a nasty guy. Everybody hates Cruz.”  No, they fear Cruz, maybe respect Cruz, but, hey, look, if you’re running a scam and somebody comes along in your own club and calls you out on it, you’re not gonna love ’em, which is what Cruz did many times.

Addressing the first point concerning Trump’s decision to boycott tomorrow night’s debate,

1.  Trump knows that Fox News has been backing the Republican Elite’s Heir to the Throne, Jeb Bush, since the start of the Republican Primary. He is not going to walk into anywhere that he perceives, right or wrong, to be an ambush.

2. Trump’s real fight is with Roger Ailes, with whom he has been negotiating. Meghan Kelly is simply being used as a focal point.

3. Any publicity is good publicity. Trump evidently feels that this will not hurt his campaign.

4. Leverage.

Concerning Trump’s assertion that he can “get along” with the Democrat Hierarchy…

On July 27. 2012. John Heubush, Executive Director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation, wrote the following op ed for The Daily Caller

  1. In order to be an effective President, you have to build a Coalition. The most effective President in my lifetime did.

“You’re in the big leagues, now.”

So the speaker of the House said to the 40th president of the United States just days after his inauguration.

It was 1981. The 97th Congress was a mixed bag, with a Democratic-controlled House, led by Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill, and a Senate held by Republicans who, for the first time since 1953, controlled a chamber of Congress.

But Ronald Reagan didn’t think “eight years as governor of one of the largest states in the union had exactly been the minor leagues.” Sacramento had been Reagan’s beta-site where nothing was accomplished until strong coalitions were formed. “It was important to develop an effective working relationship with my opponents in the legislature,” Reagan wrote, “our political disagreements not withstanding.”

What did this adversarial relationship with O’Neill and Democrats produce in the next two years? Caustic gamesmanship? A stand-off? On July 29, 1981, less than six months after Reagan took office, a strong bipartisan coalition in the House passed one of the largest tax cuts in American history, the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981. Two days later, the Senate followed suit.

How in the world did Reagan do it? Experience.

Matching wits with Jack Warner (of Warner Brothers) as head of the actors’ union and Jesse Unruh (speaker of the California State Assembly) as governor taught Reagan to come to the bargaining table prepared. “I’d learned while negotiating union contracts,” Reagan wrote, “that you seldom get everything you ask for.” (Years later, the press asked him about negotiating with Gorbachev. “It was easier than dealing with Jack Warner,” Reagan shot back.)

Although the Democrats were in a tough position after the Carter years, their big trump card was that nothing would get done unless Reagan won over a substantial number of them in the House. It’s no wonder that O’Neill was so full of braggadocio.

Somehow Reagan had to build a coalition.

The strategy to get the Economic Recovery Act passed by a conflicted Congress had two major parts.

First, Reagan would use his tremendous skills as a communicator by making repeated televised appeals to Congress and the American people. “Every time he spoke,” Reagan Chief of Staff Jim Baker recalled, “the needle moved.”

Second, the Legislative Strategy Group led by Baker and Ed Meese “did the grunt work” of inviting Democrats to the White House, while the president worked the phones. “I spent a lot of time in the spring and early summer of 1981 on the telephone and in meetings trying to build a coalition to get the nation’s recovery under way,” Reagan wrote. At the time, he even noted in his diary, “These Dems are with us on the budget and it’s interesting to hear some who’ve been here ten years or more say that it is their first time to ever be in the Oval Office. We really seem to be putting a coalition together.”

These “Dems” — the Boll Weevils — were Southern conservative Democrats who became key players in Reagan’s economic recovery strategy. It helped Reagan’s purpose that many represented districts that the president had carried in 1980. If they voted against a popular president, it could cost them their seats in 1982.

“To encourage the Boll Weevils to cross party lines,” journalist Lou Cannon wrote, “Reagan accepted a suggestion by James Baker and promised that he could not campaign in 1982 against any Democratic members of Congress who voted for both his tax and budget bills.” It was a shrewd and effective move.

2. In order to become President of the United States, you must garner more votes than the other party’s candidate. This cannot be done simply by relying on the votes of your own poltical party. You must have ‘crossover votes”.

Back on August 15, 1984, Mark Green, in an article written for the New York Times, titled, “Reagan, The Liberal Democrat”, wrote the following…

To what do we owe these conversions on the road to November? Could it be election-year opportunism? Could it be anything else?

There is a kind of historical consistency in this inconsistency: As Will Rogers noted back in the 1920’s: ”The Republicans have a habit of having three bad years and one good one, and the good ones always happened to be election years.”

If Ronald Reagan holds to this path, he may soon end up back among the Americans for Democratic Action, which he fled and renounced in the 1950’s.

Not surprisingly, ideological fellow-travelers such as the commentators William F. Buckley Jr. and Pat Buchanan have expressed dismay over their champion’s apostasy. Mr. Buchanan worries that by flirting with the idea of a summit meeting, the President ”is playing with the national security of the U.S.”

Mr. Reagan’s election-year liberalism appears designed to win over those political independents and weak Democrats who might otherwise recall him as the man who has opposed all but one of the major civil rights laws and nuclear arms control pacts of the past two decades.

Will it work? Only if these constituencies believe his reversals to be principled and permanent – and that seems unlikely. To conclude now that Ronald Reagan has suddenly become pro-environment, pro-arms control, pro-food stamps and pro-regulation is to believe that a sow’s ear can become a silk purse merely by declaring itself so.

Besides, swing voters faced this fall with the equivalent of two Democratic tickets may just as well decide to vote for the real McCoy rather than the imitation brand.

The New York Times was a Liberal Schlock Sheet, even way back in 1984.

They, like the rest of the Liberals in the Media back then, could not stand Ronald Reagan. That’s no secret. However, even they understood what Reagan. He was attracting “crossover votes” for his Second Presidential Campaign.

The constant deal-making, bravado and braggadocio, and his “willingness to work together” are arrows in the quiver of Donald J. Trump, which have served him well in the past, and have helped him become an American Success Story,

We shall see if those arrows find their mark during the Republican Presidential Primary Battle and later, the President Campaign, if he is the Nominee.

Similar arrows found the mark for Ronald Reagan.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Blatant Unprofessional Objectivity Just Cost the Democrat Lackeys at NBC the Republican Primary Debates

January 19, 2016

ModeratorsAs I have related to you before, I was a Radio News Director during college from 1978-1980, with a staff of 20 student reporters, who each received credit for producing and delivering a 5-minute newscast, once a week, on our College Radio Station.

I can remember sitting in the lecture hall of the (then) Memphis State University Journalism Building, listening to Dr. Williams, whom we all swore did the first newscast of KDKA, America’s first radio station, in 1920.  The class was “Introduction to Journalism” and Dr. Van Williams was telling us that the ” key to being a good journalist was objectivity”.

Now, in 2016, one Broadcast/Cable News Organization has become so blatantly objective, that one of America’s two political parties has had no choice but to fire them from hosting their Presidential Primary Candidate Debates.

Breitbart.com reports that

The Republican National Committee (RNC) officially voted on Monday afternoon to sever its business relationship with NBC News for the previously-scheduled Feb. 26, 2016, GOP presidential primary debate, Breitbart News has learned.

The Debate Committee for the RNC met via conference call and after hearing updates from RNC chairman Reince Priebus officially voted to cancel the partnership with NBC, according to sources on the call. The vote was unanimous.

After the October debate hosted by NBC partner CNBC—in which co-moderator John Harwood was roundly criticized for a poor performance—the RNC suspended its relationship with NBC News over that upcoming Houston debate.

“I write to inform you that pending further discussion between the Republican National Committee (RNC) and our presidential campaigns, we are suspending the partnership with NBC News for the Republican primary debate at the University of Houston on February 26, 2016,” Priebus wrote to NBC News chairman Andy Lack back in late October. “The RNC’s sole role in the primary debate process is to ensure that our candidates are given a full and fair opportunity to lay out their vision for America’s future. We simply cannot continue with NBC without full consultation with our campaigns.”

In response, NBC News signaled in a statement at the time that it thought the situation could be resolved.

“This is a disappointing development,” NBC News said in a statement. “However, along with our debate broadcast partners at Telemundo we will work in good faith to resolve this matter with the Republican Party.”

This process also sparked an unprecedented meeting of top officials with almost every GOP presidential campaign, in which campaign managers represented most of the 2016 GOP candidates to fight for better representation in the debate process. Donald Trump’s team and Dr. Ben Carson’s team, as well most of the rest of the campaigns, huddled together to wrest control away from the mainstream media—which has been, until now, dominating the process.

Clearly, however, despite NBC’s previous hopes that the RNC would reinstate the network as a moderator of the upcoming debate, the RNC has officially moved forward with formal actions to end the network’s plans for the Houston debate.

NBC News moderated Sunday evening’s Democratic debate between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.

The move by the RNC to formally extricate NBC News from the process is sure to seriously harm the media organization’s reputation, and its financial bottom line. Typically, networks make millions of dollars in ad revenue with debate moderation due to the extraordinarily high viewership.

The debate is still on the schedule–it would come after Iowans, New Hampshire citizens, South Carolinians, and Nevadans vote, heading into the all-important SEC Primary of which Texas is a part on March 1–but it’s unclear as of yet who will moderate it or where it will air.

For years, the Main Stream Media has been in bed with politicians and business moguls. While, touting objectivity, they have often fallen way short of that goal.

The Media really came into its own during the 80’s, with the advent of Cable Television, the First Iranian Hostage Crisis, and the ascension and election of President Ronald Wilson Reagan. Their advocacy of all things Liberal became very apparent, as they attacked the greatest president of this generation, mercilessly, giving no quarter.

I believe that Reagan’s election was a wake up call to the MSM. They realized that, if let to their own devices, the American Public would elect a Conservative as president, every time. And, they just couldn’t have that. They were already in too deep to their Democratic, Progressive Masters.

So, America’s Media forsook their objectivity, choosing to help to shape current events, instead of just reporting on them, in an effort to produce outcomes which would be most beneficial to the Progressive Cause.

Now, in 2015, after propping up Barack Hussein Obama and getting him re-elected, their own hubris has given them an exaggerated sense of self-importance, as to their role in our society.

Their Achilles’ Heel , the before-mentioned hubris, blinded them to the potential of the upstart Fox News Channel in informing America’s population in the Heartland, and that has been their undoing, much to Obama’s consternation.

Every night of the week, the Fox News Channel beats the mainstream outlets in popularity. There is a reason for that.

Fox News is exactly what it claims to be: fair and balanced.

The Mainstream News Channels are so far up Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s backsides that they wouldn’t know the truth if it French-kissed them.

Just as it was during the Russian Revolution, when Vladimir Leninn seized control of Russia from the Czar, and just as it was during the era of the National Socialist Party in Germany, when a former altar boy and house painter named Adolf Hitler took over, the first thing that totalitarian governments do is to take control of media, for propaganda purposes.

Through threats, coercion, and promises of reward, that is exactly what Obama did when he took office.

Of course, he did not have to try very hard. The Main Stream Media were already Obama Fanboys, their staffs being made up of a majority of Liberals.

Heck, they were posting fictitious propaganda about Barack Hussein Obama, before he was even elected president.

The election of Barack Hussein Obama is the best thing that ever happened to the Fox News Channel. It has solidified their position as the Leader in Cable News.

And, the thing about it, is the fact that Fox News is not the only source by which average Americans can obtain the truth about Obama and his administration. The New Media, the Internet, has proven to be an invaluable source for dissemination of information.

Principled reporters, such as the late Andrew Breitbart and Michelle Malkin, turned up the heat on both Obama and the MSM, by providing an alternative source through which Americans can receive news, unfiltered by those in the Halls of Power.

All during the Republican PreFsidential Primate Candidate Debates, which they have had the privilege of hosting, the NBC Debate Moderators, while doing the will of their Masters at the Network and the Democratic Party, the self-proclaimed “Broadcast Journalists” allowed the entire country to witness them practice, on live television, their actual jobs: being junkyard dogs and purveyors of propaganda , in service to a political party and ideology, who once stood for the “Working Man and Woman”, but who now stand for the worst kind  of state-sponsored fascism, racial division exacerbated by the Rhetoric of Class Warfare, and greed-inspired socialism.

It was refreshing to actually see the Republican National Committee tell them to go take a long walk off of a short pier.

It is time to take our country back.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama “Fired Up”, to Hold Gun Control Pep Rally on CNN

January 4, 2016

Party-Pooper-600-nrdHis (Obama’s) first impulse always is to take rights away from law-abiding citizens, and it’s wrong. And to use executive powers he doesn’t have is a pattern that is quite dangerous. – Republican Presidential Hopeful Jeb Bush, Fox News Sunday, 1/3/2016

ABC News reports that

Hawaiian vacation over, President Barack Obama says he is energized for his final year in office and ready to tackle unfinished business, turning immediate attention to the issue of gun violence. Obama scheduled a meeting Monday with Attorney General Loretta Lynch to discuss a three-month review of what steps he could take to help reduce gun violence. The president is expected to use executive action to strengthen background checks required for gun purchases.

Republicans strongly oppose any moves Obama may make, and legal fights seem likely over what critics would view as infringing on their Second Amendment rights. But Obama is committed to an aggressive agenda in 2016 even as public attention shifts to the presidential election.

Obama spent much of his winter vacation out of the public eye, playing golf with friends and dining out with his family. He returned to the White House about noon Sunday.

“I am fired up for the year that stretches out before us. That’s because of what we’ve accomplished together over the past seven,” Obama said his weekly radio and Internet address.

While in Hawaii, he also worked on his final State of the Union address, scheduled for Jan. 12. The prime-time speech will give the president another chance to try to reassure the public about his national security stewardship after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California.

Congressional Republicans have outlined a competing agenda for January, saying they will spend the first days of 2016 taking another crack at eliminating keys parts of the president’s health insurance law and ending federal funding for Planned Parenthood. The legislation is unlikely to become law, but it is popular with the GOP base in an election year.

The debate about what Obama may do on gun violence already has spilled over into the presidential campaign.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton has called for more aggressive executive actions on guns, and rival Bernie Sanders said he would support Obama’s expected move.

The Vermont senator told ABC’s “This Week” that he believes “there is a wide consensus” that “we should expand and strengthen the instant background check.” He added: “I think that’s what the president is trying to do and I think that will be the right thing to do.”

Republican candidates largely oppose efforts to expand background checks or take other steps that curb access to guns.

“This president wants to act as if he is a king, as if he is a dictator,” unable to persuade Congress and forcing an “illegal executive action” on the country, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie told “Fox News Sunday.”

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, also on Fox, said Obama’s “first impulse is always to take rights away from law-abiding citizens, and it’s wrong.”

In the radio address, Obama said tens of thousands of people have died from gun violence since background check legislation stalled three years ago.

“Each time, we’re told that commonsense reforms like background checks might not have stopped the last massacre, or the one before that, so we shouldn’t do anything,” Obama said. “We know that we can’t stop every act of violence. But what if we tried to stop even one?”

Federally licensed gun sellers are required by law to seek criminal background checks before completing a sale. But gun control advocacy groups say some of the people who sell firearms at gun shows are not federally licensed, increasing the chance of sales to customers prohibited by law from purchasing guns.

Obama plans to participate in a town hall Thursday night at George Mason University in Virginia on reducing gun violence. The president will take questions from the audience at the event moderated by CNN’s Anderson Cooper.

Despite his deep differences with Republicans, Obama has cited two agenda items for 2016 that have bipartisan support: a free trade agreement with 11 other nations called the Trans-Pacific Partnership and changes in the criminal justice system that would reduce incarceration rates for nonviolent offenders. He often points out that the U.S. accounts for 5 percent of the world’s population and 25 percent of its inmates.

An Executive Order, sometimes known as a proclamation, is a directive handed down directly from the President of the United States without input from the legislative or judicial branches. Executive orders can only be given to federal or state agencies, not to citizens, even though we wind up bearing the brunt of them.

Executive Orders go all the way back to our first president, George Washington. Presidents have used them to lead the nation through times of war, to respond to natural disasters and economic crises, to encourage or to limit regulation by federal agencies, to promote civil rights, or in the case of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, to set up Japanese internment camps, in order to revoke Civil Rights.

Have you ever watched a mother, when their toddler bumps their head on a table, attempt to distract their child, by pretending to spank the table, while saying, “Bad Table”?

That, in a nutshell, is what President Barack Hussein Obama is attempting to do by writing Executive Orders, in an attempt to limit the Constitutional Right of American Citizens to own guns.

By creating new restrictions, instead of enforcing gun laws which are already in place, Obama is shifting the blame from the Radical Islamic Terrorists and those who operate outside of the law to America and her citizens.

Obama is attempting to control law-abiding American Citizens, instead of punishing those who operate outside of our laws, such as the Muslim Terrorists who perpetrated the San Bernadino Massacre and the thugs who have turned Obama’s “hometown” of Chicago into their own personal “Killing Fields”.

Obama realizes that even though he “has a pen”, that does not mean that he has the national approval for his coming dictatorial action, which he claims that he has.

Therefore, he and his Administration have arranged for a “National Townhall Meeting”, to be held live on CNN, this Thursday night.

During this upcoming “Pep Rally”, I can guarantee you the following:

  1. The audience will be hand-picked by the Administration.
  2. Obama will use “human props”, like he did after the Sandy Hook Massacre and during the Obamacare Roll-out.
  3. Anderson Cooper will fawn over him, lobbing softball questions that Steve Urkel himself could hit out of the park.

Gun Control has not stopped the criminals from getting Guns in the UK. What makes Obama and his minions think that more regulations are going to accomplish what the UK has not?

Are they that full of themselves that they think that, since they are the “smartest people in the room”, that failed methods will actually work this time?

Are they just doing something to be doing something, in order to save face with their Far Left supporters?

Or, is it something more malevolent than just everyday politics?

Here’s a quote from an organization that backs Obama all the way with his Gun Confiscation efforts…

…the right-wing extremists opposing all efforts to curb gun violence are the same forces that rallied behind Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, hoping to undermine every other democratic right as well as the living standards of workers and ordinary Americans. It is for that reason, as well as the need to protect public safety, that the same coalition of labor and its allies that worked so hard and effectively to re-elect President Barack Obama must now go all-out to back his common sense proposals for gun law reform.

As Obama has charged, the extremists recklessly “gin up fear” that the government is coming to take away hunting rifles and personal weapons owned for legitimate self-defense. Led by the hate-mongering leadership of the National Rifle Association, they use a totally fraudulent and only very recent interpretation of the Second Amendment which they falsely claim as necessary for protecting every other freedom contained in the Bill of Rights.

One of their unhinged spokesmen, Texas talk show host Alex Jones, launched a national petition drive to deport CNN commentator Piers Morgan for questioning the Second Amendment. Jones said the amendment “isn’t there for duck hunting. It’s there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs,” and then went on to threaten insurrection “if you try to take our firearms.”

Actually, the Second Amendment wasn’t enacted with any of these things in mind. The amendment was adopted as a means to enable the new American republic, lacking a standing army or state national guards, to muster militia to put down domestic uprisings, including slave revolts, to repulse any attempted return by the British and to deal with clashes with Native Americans on the expanding frontier.

These issues vanished long ago. The Second Amendment is obsolete and now has been twisted to threaten the basic safety and security of all Americans. There is no basis for claiming this amendment was intended to permit unregulated personal acquisition of firearms, including amassing military weapons and private arsenals for “protection” from the government. No government, especially one that is new and fragile, has ever authorized citizens to arm themselves against it.

The preceding quote actually comes from peoplesworld.org, the website of Communist Party USA.

As I have chronicled, over the last few years, this Gun Confiscation Movement comes right out of  the playbook of Marx and Lenin.

There is one thing that Obama did not take into account, however…

Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today’s world do not have. – Ronald Reagan

And, that is why he will fail.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: The Myth of “Constitutional Religious Neutrality”

January 3, 2016

American Christianity 2Do American Political Leaders have the right to invoke the Name of the God of Abraham in their public speeches?

Or, should they keep their faith out of the Public Arena of Ideas, like the “Smartest People in the Room” keep  insisting?

The Washington Post reports that

METAIRIE, La. — Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Saturday the idea of religious neutrality is not grounded in the country’s constitutional traditions and that God has been good to the U.S. exactly because Americans honor him.

Scalia was speaking at a Catholic high school in the New Orleans suburb of Metairie, Louisiana. Scalia, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986 is the court’s longest serving justice. He has consistently been one of the court’s more conservative members.

He told the audience at Archbishop Rummel High School that there is “no place” in the country’s constitutional traditions for the idea that the state must be neutral between religion and its absence.

“To tell you the truth there is no place for that in our constitutional tradition. Where did that come from?” he said. “To be sure, you can’t favor one denomination over another but can’t favor religion over non-religion?”

He also said there is “nothing wrong” with the idea of presidents and others invoking God in speeches. He said God has been good to America because Americans have honored him. 

Scalia said during the Sept. 11 attacks he was in Rome at a conference. The next morning, after a speech by President George W. Bush in which he invoked God and asked for his blessing, Scalia said many of the other judges approached him and said they wished their presidents or prime ministers would do the same.

“God has been very good to us. That we won the revolution was extraordinary. The Battle of Midway was extraordinary. I think one of the reasons God has been good to us is that we have done him honor. Unlike the other countries of the world that do not even invoke his name we do him honor. In presidential addresses, in Thanksgiving proclamations and in many other ways,” Scalia said.

“There is nothing wrong with that and do not let anybody tell you that there is anything wrong with that,” he added.

Scalia’s comments Saturday come as the court prepares to hear arguments later this year in a case that challenges part of President Barack Obama’s health care law and whether it adequately shields faith-based hospitals, colleges and charities from having to offer contraceptive coverage to their employees.

For what now seems like an eternity, those on the Left side of Political Aisle, spearheaded by President Barack Hussein Obama,  have focused their attention on “radically changing” America.

They soon realized that they simply could not do it through popular culture and educational indoctrination, inundating America’s children with both overt and subliminal imaging designed to countermand the Traditional American Values that they were being raised with, in normal American Households, out here in “Flyover Country”, otherwise known as America’s Heartland…or “the Red States”.

Modern Liberals soon figured out that the way to program Americans into believing that “all paths lead to God” and that cradle-to-grave Nanny-State Government were the new American Standards for living our daily lives, was to turn Christian American Houses of Worship away from being instructors of the Word of God and a sanctuary in which to worship Our Creator, to, instead, being purveyors of the joys of Popular Culture. Wednesday Night Bible Studies were soon replaced by Yoga Classes and Encounter Groups. Religious Leaders were soon quoting philosophy, instead of the Bible in their Sunday Morning Sermons.

And, instead of taking a stand against those things of the world which were directly opposed to what is found in God’s Word, these “new, enlightened” churches started standing up for the “right” of a woman to have her baby prematurely yanked out of her womb with a set of tongs, standing up for the right of Adam to “marry” Steve, when the Bible states that marriage is between a man and a woman, and standing up for the equality of all faiths, when the Son of God firmly states, in John 14:6, that

I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

So, when  as all this Christianity in America going to “fade away” as predicted by “the Smartest People in the Room”?

As recent polls show…not any time soon.

America remains a nation whose population consists of 70-75%, who proclaim Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior and 92%, who believe in God.

Being filled with human beings, churches have made a lot of mistakes, However, they have also done a lot of good in the name of the Lord.

For example, the church I attend, houses a Food Pantry, operated in co-operation with other churches in our area, which feeds 2,000 people per month, counseling them, and getting them the assistance that they need.

Churches today have to walk a fine line.

The spiritual battle the influence of American Popular Culture and those seeking the Will of God in their lives, takes all the strength…and prayer, that Christians can muster.

Modern Liberals seem to have great difficulty comprehending the role which Our Creator, the God of Abraham, played and plays in this Grand Experiment, known as the United States of America.

Why have Liberals ratcheted up their anti-Christian Vitriol and Negativity since January 21, 2009?

Why are they so focused on removing America’s Christian Heritage?

Well, as is usually my wont, I have been doing some “reckoning” about this.

It seems to this ol’ Southern Boy, living here in the Heartland, that America’s Christian Heritage and the very real fact of His influence in building and shaping America’s growth into the greatest country on the face of God’s Green Earth, not only stifles and interferes with Modern Liberals’ “anything goes”, “share the wealth”, “hive-mind”, “man is his own god” Political Ideology, but the reality of God’s very existence, somewhere deep in their miserable, bitter psyches, scares the mess out of them.

Why else would they be trying so hard to fight against the influence of Someone Whom they really don’t believe in?

I see them every single day on the television, on the Internet, on Facebook Political Pages, posting stupid meme (a picture with words on it) after stupid meme, attempting to make fun of The Great I Am and those of us who have given our lives to Him.

They are so hateful, and filled with such bitterness, that it is difficult to engage them in “conversation”.

Perhaps, somewhere in their back of their minds, all of these Modern American Liberals, realize that they are fighting a losing battle.

Christianity continues to thrive in America, despite their best efforts.

For, as Justice Scalia stated so eloquently,

God has been very good to us

America was built upon a Solid Rock.

To ignore our nation’s Faith-Based Founding and Heritage is to live in purposeful ignorance.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.

And, as Hebrews 13:8 tells us,

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

Regardless of the Political Machinations of Modern American Liberals, God will have the final word, as to our country’s future.

He always does.

Until He Comes,

KJ

New Years Day 2016: Once Again, “A Time For Choosing”

January 1, 2016

th0HP8WP4PAs I sat down this morning to write something to summarize 2015, while looking forward to 2016, I thought about the Top News Stories of this past year:

The War on ISIS

The Supreme Court Ruling on “Gay Marriage”

The Paris Islamic Terrorist Attack

The San Bernadino, California Islamic Terrorist Attack

The Charleston Shooting and the Liberals’ Use of it to Censor the Confederate Battle Flag and Remove Historical Statues

“Black Lives Matter” and the Mass Riots Across America

The Hoax Known as “Climate Change”

Bowe Bergdahl

“Caitlyn” Jenner

And, last, but certainly not least, the 2016 Presidential Election 

And I wondered how the “Shining City on a Hill”, which the greatest American President in my generation, Ronald Wilson Reagan, so wonderfully described, has fallen so far, into a morass of relative morality and situational ethics.

In 1964, in his famous stump speech, “A Time for Choosing”, The Great Communicator said,

It’s time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, “We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government.”

This idea — that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power — is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream–the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order — or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, “The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.”

The Founding Fathers knew a government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.

So, is our present state of unrest and strife which we are experiencing in America, simply a matter of choice?

I believe that it is…one of individual freedom or subjugation to “princes and principalities”.

Here is a radio message which the late, great American News Commentator Paul Harvey delivered on April 3, 1965:

If I were the devil, I wouldn’t be happy until I had seized the ripest apple on the tree—Thee. So I’d set about however necessary to take over the United States. I’d subvert the churches first—I would begin with a campaign of whispers. With the wisdom of a serpent, I would whisper to you as I whispered to Eve: “Do as you please.” “Do as you please.” To the young, I would whisper, “The Bible is a myth.” I would convince them that man created God instead of the other way around. I would confide that what is bad is good, and what is good is “square”. And the old, I would teach to pray. I would teach them to pray after me, ‘Our Father, which art in Washington…’ 

And then I’d get organized. I’d educate authors on how to lurid literature exciting, so that anything else would appear dull and uninteresting. I’d threaten TV with dirtier movies and vice versa. I’d pedal narcotics to whom I could. I’d sell alcohol to ladies and gentlemen of distinction. I’d tranquilize the rest with pills. 

If I were the devil I’d soon have families that war with themselves, churches that war that themselves, and nations that war with themselves; until each in its turn was consumed. And with promises of higher ratings I’d have mesmerizing media fanning the flame. If I were the devil I would encourage schools to refine young intellects, and neglect to discipline emotions—just let those run wild, until before you knew it, you’d have to have drug sniffing dogs and metal detectors at every schoolhouse door.

Within a decade I’d have prisons overflowing, I’d have judges promoting pornography—soon I could evict God from the courthouse, and then the schoolhouse, and then from the houses of Congress. And in His own churches I would substitute psychology for religion, and deify science. I would lure priests and pastors into misusing boys and girls, and church money. If I were the devil I’d make the symbols of Easter an egg and the symbol of Christmas a bottle.If I were the devil I’d take from those, and who have, and give to those wanted until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious. What do you bet I could get whole states to promote gambling as the way to get rich? I would question against extremes and hard work, and Patriotism, and moral conduct. I would convince the young that marriage is old-fashioned, that swinging more fun, that what you see on the TV is the way to be. And thus I could undress you in public, and I could lure you into bed with diseases for which there is no cure. In other words, if I were to devil I’d keep on doing on what he’s doing.

Paul Harvey, good day.

So, are we doomed as a nation to continue to slide down this slippery slope we are traveling on? In the conclusion of “A Time for Choosing”, Ronald Reagan reminded us that the choice was ours to make…

They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that “the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits–not animals.” And he said, “There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.

As a Christian American Conservative, I believe that there is a divine spark within each one of us.

It is up to us , whether we choose to listen to that still, small voice, as He guides us through our choices we make everyday.

I also believe that this nation was forged by Christian Men, who were led by their Creator to seek the FREEDOM to worship him as they chose

In 2016, we have an opportunity to begin the journey back to reclaim the vision of our Forefathers.

It is, once again, “A Time For Choosing”.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Bernie Sanders Campaign Caught Accessing Clinton Campaign Data. The Politboro Would Be Proud.

December 18, 2015

Bernie-NRD-600Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it and hell where they already have it.- President Ronald Reagan 

The old white folks from the Northeast Corridor, whom the Democrat Party euphemistically refer to as “Potential Presidential Candidates” are not playing well with one another.

Foxnews.com reports that

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign reportedly has been punished by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) for improperly accessing voter data compiled by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The Washington Post reported late Thursday that Sanders’ campaign manager had acknowledged that a low-level staffer had viewed the information and was fired as a result. The Post reported that the DNC has told the Sanders campaign that it will not have access to the party’s master list of likely Democratic voters until it provides an explanation and destroys any copies of Clinton campaign data that it posesses.

The DNC rents out the master list to national and state campaigns, which add their own information compiled by volunteers and field workers.

Being shut out of seeing the list for any length of time would be a major blow to Sanders, who is attempting to cut into Clinton’s sizable lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

A Fox News poll released Sunday shows Clinton with a 14-point lead over Sanders among likely Democratic caucusgoers in Iowa, while a poll of New Hampshire primary voters released Thursday shows the two in a statistical tie.

The software vendor that handles the DNC master list told the Post that the breach occurred Wednesday while a patch was being applied to the software. The process briefly disabled the firewall surrounding the Clinton campaign’s data.

Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver told the Post that the Clinton data was never downloaded or printed, and placed blame for the incident with the vendor, NGP VAN.

“Sadly, the DNC is relying on an incompetent vendor who on more than one occasion has dropped the firewall between the various Democratic candidates’ data,” Weaver said.

NGP VAN describes itself on its website as “the leading technology provider to Democratic and progressive campaigns.” Stu Trevelyan, the company’s CEO, told the Post the breach was an “isolated incident that was fairly short in duration … By lunchtime, it was resolved.”

The Post reported the DNC was likely to initiate an outside audit to determine what exactly happened and whether any additional information was improperly accessed. Criminal charges were unlikely to be filed.

Ol’ Bernie’s Campaign has not been going well, as of late.

According to variety.com,

The campaign of Bernie Sanders says that there’s been a “Bernie blackout” on broadcast network newscasts, claiming that they’ve ignored him compared to major presidential candidates.

The campaign issued a press release on Friday — “Why the Bernie Blackout on Corporate Network News?” — and cited figures from the Tyndall Report showing that he has gotten just a fraction of the attention Donald Trump has. Sanders has drawn 10 minutes of coverage to Trump’s 234 minutes.

The measurement was of time devoted to stories about the Sanders campaign specifically, so coverage of his performance in a debate is not included. So by that measure, Sanders has probably gotten more center-stage exposure on the broadcast networks’ late-night talk shows than on their evening newscasts. He has appeared on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” and “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”

Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said that the “corporately owned media may not like Bernie’s anti-establishment views but for the sake of American democracy they must allow for a fair debate in this presidential campaign.”

Well, there are a couple of good reasons that the Main Stream Media is “ignoring” ol’ Bernie.

First, he doesn’t have a snowball-in-you-know-where’s chance of beating the Clinton Political Machine and winning the nomination.

Second, as we say down here in Dixie,

He’s crazier than a pet ‘coon.

As discoverthenetworks.org reports,

In May 2015, Sanders told CNBC interviewer John Harwood that he was in favor of dramatically raising the marginal tax rate on America’s highest earners. “[When] radical socialist Dwight D. Eisenhower was president,” Sanders said sarcastically, “I think the highest marginal tax rate was something like 90 percent.” When Harwood asked whether Sanders thought that was too high, the senator replied: “No. What I think is obscene, and what frightens me is, again, when you have the top one-tenth of one percent owning almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 [percent]. Does anybody think that is the kind of economy this country should have?”

In his first public speech as a presidential candidate in Burlington, Vermont, Sanders in May 2015 broadly laid out the major planks of his campaign’s agenda:

  • He declared that financial inequality “is immoral, it is bad economics, it is unsustainable.”
  • Vowing to send “a message to the billionaire class,” he said: “[Y]ou can’t have huge tax breaks [for the rich] while children in this country go hungry … while there are massive unmet needs on every corner…. Your greed has got to end…. You cannot take advantage of all the benefits of America if you refuse to accept your responsibilities.”
  • He pledged to enact “a tax system that is fair and progressive, which tells the wealthiest individuals and the largest corporations that they are going to begin to pay their fair share.”
  • Claiming that “the current federal [hourly] minimum wage of $7.25 is a starvation wage and must be raised … to $15.00 an hour.”
  • He described the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) as a “modest” step in the direction of rightfully forcing the U.S. to “join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee health care to all as a right.”  “And we must do it through a Medicare-for-all, single payer health plan,” he explained.
  • He called for “pay equity for women workers,” and “paid sick leave and guaranteed vacation time for every worker in this country.”
  • Describing the rising costs of a college education as “insane,” he vowed to “fight to make tuition in public colleges and universities free, as well as substantially lower interest rates on student loans.”
  • He pledged to “expand Social Security benefits” and mandate “a universal pre-K system for all the children of this country.”
  • Asserting that “there is nothing more important” than fighting global warming, he said: “The debate is over. The scientific community has spoken in a virtually unanimous voice. Climate change is real, it is caused by human activity, and it is already causing devastating problems in our country and throughout the world.” He elaborated that in the absence of government intervention, America would inevitably see “more drought, more famine, more rising sea level, more floods, more ocean acidification, [and] more extreme weather disturbances,” he elaborated, in the absence of government intervention.
  • He called for the government to use taxpayer dollars to rebuild America’s “crumbling infrastructure” by repairing “our roads, our bridges, our water systems, our rail and airports.” Sanders added he would begin this process by working to advance, in the Senate, a five-year, $1 trillion bill that he himself had proposed, claiming that it “would create and maintain 13 million good paying jobs.”

In September 2015, Sanders’s presidential campaign received the support of the former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who wrote: “I believe that among the Sanders supporters there are thousands who are dissatisfied, who are disgruntled, but who do not have a coherent left analysis, who therefore are open to our ideas as they weren’t before they got involved in the Sanders surge…. So, why don’t we joi[n] a Sanders local campaign or go to a mass rally?… We could have lists of places and projects where anarchists and others are working with people in projects that are using anarchist and community participatory ideas and vision. Places where Bernie supporters might get involved once they knew about them.”

Y’all remember Bomber Bill Ayers, don’t you?

He launched Barack Hussein Obama’s Illinos State Senate Campaign from his living room.

Of course, years later, aspiring Presidential Candidate Obama would refer to the Murderous Anarchist as,

Just another guy in the neighborhood.

But, I digress…

Bernie Sanders, “evangelist” of the failed political ideology of Marxism, member of the rapidly-tanking American Political Party known as “Democrats”, seems to basically appeal to the collegiate and “slacker” vote, the MTV Generation, still living in Mom’s Basement, who cling to the vision of “money for nothing and their chicks for free”.

What his collective hive-mind of group-thinking followers do not seem to grasp is the reality that Marxism has NEVER worked, anywhere that it has been tried.

Man’s own greed and corruption, as in the case of the old Russian Politboro, always gets in the way of their dream for a Socialist Utopia.

That is the reason that Marxism remains a THEORY…and a failed one, at that.

The news potentially isn’t all bad for ol’ Bernie, though.

Perhaps, they will make a remake of “Back to the Future”.

He’s a dead ringer for Doc Emmett Brown.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Republican Debate Aftermath: It’s Time for the Party to Embrace “Bold Colors” and Dump “Pale Pastels”

December 16, 2015

conservative1The last Republican Presidential Primary Debate was held last night on CNN.,,and things got a little heated.

Foxnews.com reports that

The rivalry between Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio flared Tuesday at the final Republican primary debate of the year, as all the leading GOP candidates battled to show their tough-on-terror credentials.

Donald Trump, as in past debates, sparred sharply with his rivals on stage over his controversial proposals, notably his call to ban Muslims from entering the country. But the changing dynamics in the race appeared to drive frequent clashes between the senators from Texas and Florida – who are now battling to be the Trump alternative in the race as Ben Carson slides in the polls.

With the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., refocusing the race squarely on security issues, Cruz from the outset tried to sound a tough message against radical Islam.

“We will utterly destroy ISIS,” Cruz vowed, later adding: “ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism will face no more determined foe than I will be.”

But he repeatedly was challenged by Rubio over his Senate positions – including for legislation reining in NSA metadata collection. Rubio accused Cruz of helping take away a “valuable tool” for security officials, while Cruz said: “Marco knows what he’s saying isn’t true.”

Rubio later cited a budget vote by Cruz to say: “You can’t carpet bomb ISIS if you don’t have planes and bombs to attack them with.”

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie used the arguing to contrast his own executive experience against the senators’ legislative history. He described their jobs as “endless debates about how many angels on the head of a pin from people who have never had to make a consequential decision.”

But Rubio and Cruz returned to the fray later on as they tried to cast each other as soft on illegal immigration. “I led the fight against [Rubio’s] legalization-amnesty bill,” Cruz charged.

Some analysts had expected the tensions Tuesday to flare between Trump and Cruz, as the Texas senator surpasses Trump in Iowa polls and is surging nationally. But Cruz avoided taking on Trump in favor of Rubio – he even jokingly backed Trump’s plan to build a border wall.

“We will build a wall that works, and I’ll get Donald Trump to pay for it,” Cruz said.

Later on, Trump backed off comments where he said Cruz acted in Congress like “a bit of a maniac.” Trump said Tuesday, “He’s just fine, don’t worry about it.”

Instead, Trump took heat mostly from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who slammed Trump’s plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States as “not a serious proposal.”  

“He’s a chaos candidate, and he’d be a chaos president,” Bush said.

Trump fired back that “Jeb doesn’t really believe I’m unhinged” and only went after him because he’s “failed in this campaign.”

The Trump-Bush acrimony simmered throughout the debate, with Bush later telling Trump he can’t “insult your way to the presidency,” and Trump once again reminding Bush that his poll numbers have plummeted while Trump is leading.

Whether Bush’s attacks will help the struggling candidate remains to be seen. Perhaps more consequential is whether Rubio or Cruz can present himself as more capable of taking on the country’s security challenges.

All the leading candidates, though, focused on the terror threat throughout the CNN-hosted primary debate Tuesday night in Las Vegas – an event held just hours after Los Angeles closed its school system over a terror threat.

Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment has been hurt by President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s policies.

“America has been betrayed,” he said.

Christie cited his experience as a federal prosecutor, and governor, in saying that under a Christie presidency, “America will be safe.”

Carson also dismissed “PC” concerns about some of his own plans for taking on the terror threat.

“We are at war … We need to be on a war footing,” Carson said, while later making an argument against toppling foreign dictators. He compared the situation to being on a plane, where passengers in an emergency are advised to use oxygen masks themselves before helping others.

“We need oxygen right Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment now,” Carson said, adding the government needs to think of the needs of the American people before solving everyone else’s problems.

Trump also sparred at times with other lower-polling candidates.

As before, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul questioned Trump’s policy proposals, including to restrict the Internet to clamp down on ISIS’ social media use. “Do you believe in the Constitution?” Paul said of Trump supporters. Trump clarified he’s only talking about restricting the Internet in parts of Iraq and Syria.

And when Trump suggested that the money spent toppling Mideast dictators could have been better spent on building America’s roads and bridges, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina compared him to Obama.

“That’s exactly what President Obama has said. I’m amazed to hear that from a Republican presidential candidate,” she said.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich also took issue with suggestions from Cruz and Trump that the priority in Syria is not to remove Bashar Assad.

“We can’t back off of this,” Kasich said. “He must go.”

CNN also hosted a debate Tuesday for the second-tier GOP candidates — former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former New York Gov. George Pataki. Graham was particularly critical of Trump’s Muslim ban plan at that debate, accusing him of declaring war on Islam and delivering a “coup” for ISIS.

About the scourge known as “Political Correctness”…it definitely was one of the topics for discussion last night…

Candidates in the GOP presidential primary debate Tuesday said “political correctness” has contributed to the rise of attacks by Islamic extremists in the U.S. and other Western countries.

“Political correctness is killing people,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said.

He and several of the other candidates suggested in the CNN debate that fear of offending Muslims has resulted in the U.S. intelligence community failing to aggressively find the “radicalized” members who commit terror acts.

Cruz, surging in recent polls to challenge front-running Donald Trump, also criticized the Department of Homeland Security. He suggested the agency failed to vet social media well enough to learn that the female Muslim attacker in the deadly San Bernardino, Calif., shootings this month wanted to commit jihad.  

Trump, who after the Dec. 2 massacre proposed a temporary ban on Muslims coming into the United States, has said repeatedly that he will not hew to political correctness, especially on issues of national security.  

Candidate Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, in the earlier, second-tier debate said, “We’ve defunded and tied the hands behind the backs of our intelligence agencies because of political correctness.”

You will notice that Senator Ted Cruz and Billionaire Entrepreneur Donald J. Trump have backed off going after reach other…at least, for now.

They realize that now is not the time, politically speaking.

Now is the time to narrow the field.

The Republican Party needs to encourage some of the lower-tier candidates to ease on out of the Primary Race.

Especially the one whom they were backing…Jeb Bush.

They are not helping what, at this point, appears to be the inevitable fact that the next President of the United States will be a Republican.

The problem for the Republican Establishment, is that is will not be one of them.

The public wants new ideas. We are tired of dancing to the Washington Two-Step.

That is the reason for the popularity of Trump and Cruz. They have been saying the things that Americans have been wanting to hear for some time now.

That is the reason that they are the Leaders in the Republican Primary.

Contrast them to the candidates whom the Democrats are offering: old white folks from the Northeast Corridor, one who is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg and the other, a demented old socialist, who resembles Doc Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future”.

The “Vichy Republicans” as I refer to them, are looking a Gift Horse in the mouth.

They are positioned to sweep the nation, on the way to placing their candidate in the Oval Office, buoyed by a Grassroots Movement, the likes of has not been seen since the 1980 Presidential Election, which put into office the greatest president in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

All the Republicans have to do to be successful is something that they seem to have forgotten how to do, since they themselves were swept into Congressional Power in the 2010 and 2012 Mid-Term Elections.

They need to pay attention and actually listen to the voters who gave them their cushy jobs.

The need to stop backing the wrong “horse”.

As Ronald Reagan, himself, said, at CPAC in 1975,

It is time to raise a banner of BOLD COLORS! Not PALE PASTELS!

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

 

The New Bolsheviks: College Protests Continue, Expanding Across America. Who is Behind It?

November 12, 2015

th (49)The year is 1903, The Russian Social Democratic Party is meeting in London. All the intellectuals in their party have been arguing since the end of the 1800′s as to the direction the party should take. One year earlier, in 1902, a man named Lenin, living in exile, wrote a paper entitled, “What Is To Be Done”.

The work was smuggled into Russia and spelled out his views regarding what the Social Democrats should be doing as a party. Lenin attacked party members who “were content to wait while history took its predetermined course.” Rather than wait, Lenin wanted to kick-start the issue he believed in to get things done rather than wait on intellectuals sitting around refuting each other’s ideas. The meeting resulted in a Party split creating the Mentsheviks and the Bolsheviks. The two factions reunited under Lenin in April 1905. Lenin went on to organize the November 1917 Russian Revolution on the Promise of “peace. bread, and land”.

On the night of Nov. 6 (Oct. 24, O.S.), the Bolsheviks staged a coup, engineered by Trotsky; aided by the workers’ Red Guard and the sailors of Kronstadt, they captured the government buildings and the Winter Palace in Petrograd. A second all-Russian congress of soviets met and approved the coup after the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries walked out of the meeting. A cabinet, known as the Council of People’s Commissars, was set up with Lenin as chairman, Trotsky as foreign commissar, Rykov as interior commissar, and Stalin as commissar of nationalities. The second congress immediately called for cessation of hostilities, gave private and church lands to village soviets, and abolished private property.

By now, you’re saying, “So?  What does Lenin’s push to power and the subsequent Russian Revolution have to do with what is going on in America right now…our horrible economy, our still-massive unemployment, the illegal alien invasion, and now, these protests on College Campuses across the  nation?”

Keep reading. I’ll explain.

The New York Times reports that

The passion that ousted the heads of the University of Missouri after protests over racial discrimination on campus is spreading to other colleges across the country, turning traditional fall semesters into a period of intense focus on racial misunderstanding and whether activism stifles free speech.

Hundreds of students demonstrated at Ithaca College in upstate New York on Wednesday, demanding the resignation of the college president, Tom Rochon, for what they said was his lackluster response to complaints of racial insensitivity on campus, including an episode in which two white male alumni on a panel called a black alumna a “savage,” after she said she had a “savage hunger” to succeed.

At Smith College, in Northampton, Mass., about 100 students demonstrated in solidarity with their counterparts in Ithaca and Missouri, while at the University of Kansas, the administration called a town hall meeting to give students and faculty a chance “to be heard” before any concerns about race on campus could grow.

At Claremont McKenna College in California, the junior class president resigned Tuesday after a furor over a Facebook photograph that showed her posing with two women who were wearing sombreros, ponchos and mustaches for Halloween. A campus demonstration followed on Wednesday.

And at Yale, the campus is still in turmoil about an overheard “white girls only” remark at an off-campus fraternity party, and debating over whether students had a right to wear transgressive Halloween costumes.

In interviews, students say they have been inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement that grew out of the fatal shooting of Michael Brown by the police in Ferguson, Mo. They say the victory of protesting students and football players at the University of Missouri has spurred them to demand that their universities provide a safe space for students of color.

In New Haven, Aaron Z. Lewis, a 21-year-old senior at Yale, used to spend his days studying cognitive science and thinking about what he will do after graduation. Now he is devoting his time to protesting and writing about racial injustice, particularly for black women, on campus and elsewhere.

Mr. Lewis and other students said the racism they had experienced or observed was often subtle rather than blatant, but no less disturbing and no less deserving of attention.

“I don’t think it matters what my own personal experiences are with this,” Mr. Lewis said. “What matters is that we all need to have empathy for the experiences that people of color have even if we don’t have those experiences for ourselves.”

He added, “It really is hard to believe because we want to believe that we’re a postracial society, but it’s just not true.”

At Smith, the protesting students gathered at noon in a tight circle, with umbrellas and parkas to shield them from the afternoon’s spitting rain. Some had left classes 10 or 15 minutes early.

“Systematic oppression affects us all,” said Tyahra Angus, a senior, speaking through a megaphone to the group, a mix of minority and white students.

The environs were a far cry from the University of Missouri. Smith’s undergraduate student body is all women and the institution itself is situated in a progressive college town. It is not in the midst of major upheaval.

But the students who gathered on Wednesday spoke of “microaggressions” — tone-deaf slights directed toward minority students — and continuing difficulties of being a student of color on a contemporary college campus, and encouraged their peers to raise awareness of them.

“It’s the microaggressions in classrooms,” Raven Fowlkes-Witten, a junior who organized Wednesday’s demonstration, said in an interview. “It’s students not feeling represented. It’s few faculty members of color,”

As Ms. Fowlkes-Witten addressed the group, she stood under an umbrella held by Donna Lisker, the dean of the college.

“I don’t think I ever want to fall into a false sense of security that things can’t happen here,” Ms. Lisker said in an interview after the demonstration, adding, “Being continually reflective about what you’re doing, and listening — that’s why I went today.”

At Ithaca, one of the issues is the on-campus panel on Oct. 8, in which Tatiana Sy, a 2009 graduate, said she had a “savage hunger” to do everything in college. Another panelist, J. Christopher Burch, the chief executive of Burch Creative Capital who is also an alumnus, responded, “I love what the savage here said,” according toYouTube clips of the event. The moderator, Bob Kur, a former NBC News correspondent, joined in, pointing to Mr. Burch, saying, “You are driven,” and pointing to Ms. Sy and saying, “You’re the savage.” The men are both white, and Ms. Sy describes herself as Afro-Cuban.

When Ms. Sy objected, Mr. Burch said, “It’s a compliment.” Mr. Burch later apologized.

Ms. Sy, the special events director for the Downtown Ithaca Alliance, said in an interview on Wednesday that she had been uncomfortable because Mr. Burch had continued to refer to her as “the savage” even after she reminded him what her name was. “You could sense that there was an energy in the room that everyone was uncomfortable with,” she said.

Nalani Haueter, 19, a sophomore and sociology major at Ithaca from San Luis Obispo, Calif., said Wednesday that she has been shocked by the numbers of people participating in protests and meetings. “Throughout the last couple of months,” she said, “it’s grown into a large percentage of this campus being active and paying attention.”

In a statement Wednesday, Tom Grape, the chairman of the Ithaca College board, said the trustees took the issues seriously and would work with Mr. Rochon to address them. Mr. Rochon, who attended Wednesday’s protests, has promised changes, including the hiring of a diversity officer and the creation of a review board for complaints about the campus police.

In a campus email, the president of Claremont McKenna College, Hiram E. Chodosh, said, “I stand by our students,” and announced steps including a new leadership position on diversity and help for new students, especially first-generation college students, in adjusting to campus life. Mr. Chodosh said in an interview that one role of higher education was “to provide a very special home for our students as a bridge from their families to the truly adult and independent world.”

Roger Lopez, 19, a sophomore studying political science at Yale who grew up in New York City, said some students had been so upset and consumed by recent events that they had asked for extensions on major papers or exams.

Students had even started questioning whether it was appropriate to call the leaders of the university’s residential colleges “masters,” because they thought the term had connotations of slavery.

Rush Limbaugh made the following remark on his radio program, yesterday:

Okay.  Do you notice any commonality here?  One of the major complaints at Mizzou: “Students don’t feel safe!”  Citizens of Baltimore don’t feel safe.  In Ferguson, Missouri, they don’t feel safe.  But predominantly the University of Missouri Columbia, they don’t feel safe. They feel very scared.  It’s really traumatic, you know?  And at Ithaca? Oh, it’s so scary, Carol. Students feel unsafe, and you can understand it! I mean, we didn’t get our diversity officer when they promised one. So there’s nobody, nobody to enforce fairness and equality. So, yeah, we feel really unsafe.  Notice the commonality? “Unsafe.” That tells me the whole thing is coming from a manual.  There’s an instruction manual here, blueprints or what have you. 

It isn’t spontaneous by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly, El Rushbo.

Breitbart.com asks and answers the following question…

Are the same radicals who influenced the burning down of parts of St. Louis at all influencing or even present at the University of Missouri?

A Breitbart News examination of Twitter accounts shows the presence in Columbia of two individuals from Black Lives Matter who fanned the flames in Ferguson, Baltimore, and Charleston, South Carolina. DeRay McKesson and Johnetta Elzie have tweeted their presence in Columbia and published photos of them meeting with Student Body President Payton Head.

McKesson calls himself “an American civil rights activist.” He’s founder of something called We the Protesters that, according to its website, is dedicated to “radical liberation” focusing exclusively on “black lives.” McKesson is a 2007 graduate of Bowdoin College and has worked as “Senior Director of Human Capital at the Minneapolis Public Schools. McKesson has been active at protests in Ferguson, Baltimore, and Charleston, South Carolina after the shootings there.

McKesson’s frequent partner is Johnetta Elzie who is also present in Columbia. She, too, is identified as an “American civil rights activist.” She seems to have gotten her start at the Ferguson riots where she edited the Ferguson protest newsletter but she has also been present at the Baltimore troubles. She co-founded We the Protestors with McKesson.

Elzie founded the website “Mapping Police Violence” and The Atlantic Monthly identified her as one of the leaders of the Black Lives Matter.

The Huffington Post published an “Open Letter from Ferguson Protesters and Allies” written by McKesson and Elzie where they said, “We are not concerned if this inconveniences you. We are not concerned if this disturbs your comfort. We are not concerned if this upsets your order. We are not concerned if this upsets your order. This is an American Horror Story.” The letter concluded, “Your calm is built on our terror. We will disrupt your life until we can live.”

McKesson, identified as part of Black Lives Matter, lectured at the Yale Divinity School. In May, the New York Times identified Elzie and McKesson as the founders of the national “first 21st century civil rights movement.”

McKesson and Elzie were given the Howard Zinn Freedom to Write Award from the New England Branch of PEN and were named on Fortune Magazine’s list of The World’s 50 Greatest Leaders. They were listed at #11 behind Taylor Swift but ahead of Bill Gates.

DeRay Tweet with Elzie and Mizzou hunger striker Jonathan Butler.

As I reported, earlier this week, The Open Society Institute, financed by Billionaire Puppetmaster and Nazi Collaborator, George Soros, is providing the funds for Black Lives Matter to travel to hot spots around the country.

Which leads us back to the earlier history lesson on the Russian Revolution…

Lenin rose to power during a time of economic plight in Russia, which was perceived as being the result of a greedy upper class. In order to depose the Czar and his government, Lenin had to solidify the “have-nots”, the Mentsheviks and the Bolsheviks, into his own private army, designed to usher in his “Glorious Revolution”.

He got them on his side by promising them a better, more prosperous life, in which the benevolent “Nanny-State” Government, would supply all of their needs.

By ginning up the dependent base already here…and growing…due to the influx of illegals…Black Lives Matter, acting with the passive (at least, publicly) support of the White House and the Democratic Party and all of their Liberal Minions are infiltrating America’s College Campuses, promising “Free Tuition”, “Empowering Students”,  “Power to the People” and all that jazz, creating their own “Revolutionary Army”, attempting to fulfill Barack Hussein Obama’s promise of “rapidly changing” America as we know it.

Far fetched? Perhaps.

However, Norman Mattoon Thomas (1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America, infamously said,

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

How do we stop this?

The greatest President in my lifetime, Ronald Wilson Reagan, once said,

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. 

It’s time to stand up to the Bullies.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

“Faith of Our Fathers, Living Still…”: Baylor University Study Finds Christianity Thriving

November 12, 2015

th (48)According to a report published at ChristianPost.com, the death of Christianity in America has been greatly exaggerated.

WASHINGTON — Distinguished scholars from Baylor University on Tuesday decried the myth that religion is on the decline in America and argued that it’s actually growing and is stronger than ever.

Professors from Baylor University’s Institute for Religion Studies in Waco, Texas, participated in a panel discussion at the National Press Club focusing on the “secularization myth,” where they lambasted the media’s spin on various surveys which has led many to believe that irreligion is on the rise in the United States.

Even though surveys have found there to be a rise in individuals who don’t identify with a particular religion or denomination (“nones”) and a decline in church membership for many Mainline denominations, the panelists agreed that those results don’t mean that religion is on its deathbed or that atheism is on the rise.

Byron Johnson, a professor of social sciences and the founding director of the Institute for Religion Studies, explained that survey results are often misrepresented in the media. He quoted a study done by Pew Research, which found that 44 percent of Americans have left the particular faith affiliation in which they were raised.

“There wasn’t one media account from that good study that said this is a good thing. This was also thrown in this huge bucket of bad news that was thrown out there. We look at that study and say that is a phenomenal thing that people would switch churches,” Johnson explained. “We see this is a measure of vitality and health and others are interpreting it is an abandoning of the faith, just because I think they read something into the data that wasn’t there or they misinterpreted the data.”

J. Gordon Melton, professor of American religious history, explained that although Mainline denominations have lost membership in recent years, the number of denominations in America has increased steadily since the 1960s. Now, there are over 1,000 denominations in the U.S.

Melton cited the Encyclopedia of American Religion and the 2010 American Religious Census to show that, as the American population has risen, church membership in America has risen at a much quicker rate.

“While some churches have lost membership over the last 65 years, simultaneously, hundreds of new denominations have been founded, and while population has more than doubled, church membership has more than quadrupled,” Melton wrote in his powerpoint presentation. “It is still in an upward trajectory.”

According to the data, 81 percent of people throughout the world claim to belong to an organized faith, and many of the rest said they attend worship services. Seventy-four percent of the world’s population said religion is an important part of their daily lives, while 50 percent said they attended a place of worship in the past seven days.

Stark points out that very few nations have as much as 5 percent of the population claiming to be atheist. China, Vietnam, and South Korea are the only countries where atheism exceeds 20 percent.

“All of the great world religions are growing and contrary to uninformed accounts, Christianity is growing faster than any of the others,” Stark wrote, according to Johnson. “But the larger point is that we are now in the 21st century, contrary to [historical claims of the religion’s demise], the world is far more religious than it was a century ago, and quite possibly, it is more religious than it has ever been.”

Much of the discussion was on the phenomenon of the rise of the religious nones. Although many media outlets have assumed that nones are similar to an atheist mindset, Johnson explained that is because many journalists “don’t know the difference between good research and bad research.”

Johnson examined an ARIS survey, which asked respondents “What religion are you?” Although the survey has found that more people today are answering “none” or not indicating their religion, a lot is left up to interpretation as to what the result really means.

Johnson said that in order to better gauge the religiosity of the population, a more in depth religious identification process is needed in surveys. Johnson and Baylor conducted their own survey, where they gave respondents a table of options to chose from with different  religious denominations and faiths they could select.

Johnson explained that 30.8 percent of the respondents who answered “don’t know” were able to provide the name of their house of worship and an address to the house of worship when asked a few questions later.

Additionally, 10 percent of those who said they had “no religion,” were also able to give the name of their house of worship.

“They put no religion and then they give us a name of a denomination and they are familiar enough with it to give us an address. We actually checked out some of those addresses and found out that a lot of them attend Evangelical non-denominational churches,” Johnson said. “When you look at the nones, it is a complicated thing for sure. It is not what everyone is being led to believe. The religious landscape of America is a complicated one.”

Melton asserted that just because respondents answered “no religion” or “none” doesn’t not mean that they are not spiritual or lacking in faith.

“Are ‘nones’ to be equated with irreligious? We have seen the ‘nones’ being identified most strongly with non-believers, we have seen the ‘nones,’ regularly, in 80 percent of the articles that come out, ‘nones’ have been equated with the irreligious,” Melton said. “That’s not the case. We have a large segment of the ‘nones’ who are atheists and irreligious, but we have a large segment that fall into spiritual but not religious category. … The largest group are ones who say Christianity is not a religion.”

Thomas Kidd, a Baylor history professor, agreed that the increase in the amount of nones could likely be due to the increase in Christians who no longer feel they need to socially identify their faith as a religion. But that doesn’t mean that atheism is increasing in American society.

“It turns out the group of people who are self-professed atheists are significant but holding steady at a really low percentage,” Kidd told CP. “I think that if it was the case that there was a massive surge of atheism, I think that a lot of the media has decided that is not only the most click-worthy type of story, but it would be a historic change of unprecedented significance if it was true.”

“I have had to tell reporters that ‘nones’ does not mean atheists,” Kidd, who formerly wrote for World magazine, added. “People who are reporting on religion have to be helped along to the texture, but texture doesn’t work well in short news reports.”

For what now seems like an eternity, those on the Left side of Political Aisle, have focused their attention on “radically changing” America.

They soon realized that they simply could not do it through popular culture and educational indoctrination, inundating America’s children with both overt and subliminal imaging designed to countermand the Traditional American Values that they were being raised with, in normal American Households, out here in “Flyover Country”, otherwise known as America’s Heartland…or “the Red States”.

Modern Liberals soon figured out that the way to program Americans into believing that “all paths lead to God” and that cradle-to-grave Nanny-State Government were the new American Standards for living our daily lives, was to turn Christian American Houses of Worship away from being instructors of the Word of God and a sanctuary in which to worship Our Creator, to, instead, being purveyors of the joys of Popular Culture. Wednesday Night Bible Studies were soon replaced by Yoga Classes and Encounter Groups. Religious Leaders were soon quoting philosophy, instead of the Bible in their Sunday Morning Sermons.

And, instead of taking a stand against those things of the world which were directly opposed to what is found in God’s Word, these “new, enlightened” churches started standing up for the “right” of a woman to have her baby prematurely yanked out of her womb with a set of tongs, standing up for the right of Adam to “marry” Steve, when the Bible states that marriage is between a man and a woman, and standing up for the equality of all faiths, when the Son of God firmly states, in John 14:6, that

I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

So, when  as all this Christianity in America going to “fade away” as predicted by “the Smartest People in the Room”?

As this report shows…not any time soon.

Being filled with human beings, churches have made a lot of mistakes, However, they have also done a lot of good in the name of the Lord.

For example, the church I attend, houses a Food Pantry, operated in co-operation with other churches in our area, which feeds 2,000 people per month, counseling them, and getting them the assistance that they need.

Churches today have to walk a fine line.

The spiritual battle the influence of American Popular Culture and those seeking the Will of God in their lives, takes all the strength…and prayer, that Christians can muster.

Modern Liberals seem to have great difficulty comprehending the role which Our Creator, the God of Abraham, played and plays in this Grand Experiment, known as the United States of America.

Why have Liberals ratcheted up their anti-Christian Vitriol and Negativity since January 21, 2009?

Why are they so focused on removing America’s Christian Heritage?

Well, as is usually my wont, I have been doing some “reckoning” about this.

It seems to this ol’ Southern Boy, living here in the Heartland, that America’s Christian Heritage and the very real fact of His influence in building and shaping America’s growth into the greatest country on the face of God’s Green Earth, not only stifles and interferes with Modern Liberals’ “anything goes”, “share the wealth”, “hive-mind”, “man is his own god” Political Ideology, but the reality of God’s very existence, somewhere deep in their miserable, bitter psyches, scares the mess out of them.

Why else would they be trying so hard to fight against the influence of Someone Whom they really don’t believe in?

I see them every single day on the television, on the Internet, on Facebook Political Pages, posting stupid meme (a picture with words on it) after stupid meme, attempting to make fun of The Great I Am and those of us who have given our lives to Him.

They are so hateful, and filled with such bitterness, that it is difficult to engage them in “conversation”.

Perhaps, somewhere in their back of their minds, all of these Modern American Liberals, realize that they are fighting a losing battle.

Christianity continues to thrive in America, despite their best efforts.

America was built upon a Solid Rock.

To ignore our nation’s Faith-Based Founding and Heritage is to live in purposeful ignorance.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.

And, as Hebrews 13:8 tells us,

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

Regardless of the Political Machinations of Modern American Liberals, God will have the final word.

He always does.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,716 other followers