Archive for the ‘American History’ Category

VIDEO RED FLAG LAWS

Thursday, August 22nd, 2019

 

VIDEO  
 An Open Letter To Our Legislators, Judges And Lawmen Regarding the Red Flag Laws – YouTube


.

Published on Mar 17, 2019

This open letter was delivered by Dr. Chuck Baldwin prior to the message on Sunday, March 17, 2019, during the service at Liberty Fellowship. The letter addresses the “red flag” gun confiscation law (Senate Bill 7) currently being proposed by Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC). President Donald Trump is also pushing this gun confiscation bill. This open letter addresses the egregious unconstitutionality of “red flag” laws and the dangerous ramifications that will result should this bill become law
Share

VIDEO – MARK LEVIN – POLITICAL CORRECTNESS LIFE, LIBERTY, AND LEVIN SHOW

Monday, August 19th, 2019

 

VIDEO   MARK LEVIN  – LIFE, LIBERTY AND LEVIN   AUGUST 18, 2019

Dr. Charles Kesler joins Mark Levin on “Life, Liberty & Levin” to discuss political correctness and its intolerance for the moral imperfection of fellow Americans.

Charles Kesler is a Claremont Senior Fellow and editor of the Claremont Review of Books.

Share

VIDEO JOHNNY CASH THE RAGGED OLD FLAG

Sunday, August 18th, 2019

 

VIDEO   Johnny Cash    The Ragged Old Flag
Share

THE DREAM TEAM LOSES TO THE NOBODIES – VICTOR DAVIS HANSON

Friday, August 16th, 2019

 

A great recap (with a little humor thrown in) by Victor Davis Hanson of the Collusion Implosion.  Nancy

The Dream Team Loses to the Nobodies

by Victor Davis Hanson

August 5, 2019

 

When figurehead Robert Mueller likely allowed Andrew Weissman to form his special counsel team to investigate so-called charges of Russian collusion involving Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Kremlin, Washington elites became bouncy. The high-profile legal “powerhouse” lineup immediately looked like a sure-thing—an elite slaughter of the yokels.

As they perused the résumés of the New York and Washington prosecutors, and the Wilmer-Hale veterans, reporters were ecstatic that the supposedly straight-shooting Republican Mueller had turned his investigation into what the media soon boasted was a progressive “dream team” of “all-stars,” a veritable “hunter-killer team” of get-Trump professionals. One would have thought mere names and credentials win indictments, regardless of the evidence.

The subtext was that Trump had all but met his Waterloo. Indictments for conspiracy, obstruction, and worse yet inevitably would follow, until Trump either resigned in disgrace or was impeached. The media counterparts of the dream-team on MSNBC and CNN would make short work of the rubes. On air law professors and legal analysts who knew “Bob” Mueller (the same ones who assured us that “Jim” Comey was a “straight-shooter”), after all, swore this would be true.

Almost all the all-stars were not just liberal but “correct” as well. Many were either Clinton donors; a few in the past had defended either Clinton aides or the Clinton foundation. Many also had been tagged as Department of Justice future superstars. Their tony degrees seemed designed to spell the doom of the buffoon Trump.

Wired immediately boasted of Mueller’s team, “From the list of hires, it’s clear, in fact, that Mueller is recruiting perhaps the most high-powered and experienced team of investigators ever assembled by the Justice Department.” If “high-powered” seemed the signature adjective, then “ever assembled” was supposed to sound downright scary.

Vox headline on August 2, 2017 summed up the progressive giddiness of the time: “Meet the all-star legal team who may take down Trump.” The subtitle offered more snark: “Special counsel Robert Mueller’s legal team is full of pros. Trump’s team makes typos.” Get it? Young-gun pros against the so-sos.

So, whom exactly did Trump enlist against the all-stars?

An NPR editorialist in June 2017 condescendingly tried to explain Trump’s hapless plight: “If you asked a Washington insider to come up with a legal dream team for a situation like this, it’s highly unlikely this is who they would come up with. But President Trump came into office as an outsider and continues to operate that way, and in a way his legal team is a reflection of that as well.”

What is “this” and who exactly is “who”?

Trump’s Team: Not a Harvard Law Degree in Sight

(more…)

Share

2 VIDEOS RE ‘THE CHARLOTTESVILLE LIE’ PRAGER U VIDEO – RESTRICTED BY GOOGLE

Wednesday, August 7th, 2019

 

Prager U’s latest video ( The Charlottesville Lie) has been restricted  by Google.  The first video is Dennis Prager being interviewed by Fox and Friends regarding  Google’s censorship.  The second video is the actual Charlottesville Lie video.  You be the judge whether this video needs to be restricted by Google.    Nancy
VIDEO – FOX NEWS  INTERVIEW WITH DENNIS PRAGER RE VIDEO CENSORSHIP ON GOOGLE
VIDEO – THE CHARLOTTESVILLE LIE  – PRAGER U

The Charlottesville Lie

Aug 05, 2019

2m

Did President Trump call neo-Nazis “very fine people” during a famous press conference following the Charlottesville riots of August 2017? The major media reported that he did. But what if their reporting is wrong? Worse, what if their reporting is wrong and they know it’s wrong? A straight exploration of the facts should reveal the truth. That’s what CNN political analyst Steve Cortes does in this critically important video.

 

 

Share

JOE BIDEN’S IRAQ MEMORIES

Monday, August 5th, 2019

 

I have always thought of Biden as one of those people who waits to see which way the wind is blowing before taking  a position on any subject.  Nancy

Joe Biden’s Iraq Memories

The former Vice President omits a few details about his strategic misjudgments.

August 3, 2019

Joe Biden speaks during the Senate Foreign Relations hearing, July 31, 2002. PHOTO: CQ-ROLL CALL|,INC.

Foreign policy was barely discussed at the Democratic presidential debates this week, and not in a good way when it was. The main point seemed to be to stop “endless war,” which sounds like Donald Trump as a candidate in 2016.

That includes Joe Biden, who as a former Vice President and veteran of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should know better. Yet when criticized about his 2002 vote for the Iraq war, Mr. Biden had a memory lapse.

“I did make a bad judgment, trusting the President [George W. Bush] saying he was only doing this to get inspectors in and get the U.N. to agree to put inspectors in,” Mr. Biden said. “From the moment ‘shock and awe’ started, from that moment I was opposed to the effort, and I was outspoken as much as anyone at all in the Congress and the Administration.”

Mr. Biden forgets that he was also a loud critic of Saddam Hussein, had been so for many years, and also worried that the dictator might have weapons of mass destruction. Everyone knew that the vote in 2002 was about authorizing a potential military intervention.

But Mr. Biden didn’t stop there this week. “Secondly,” he added, “I was asked by the President [Barack Obama] in the first meeting we had on Iraq, he turned and said, ‘Joe, get our combat troops out,’ in front of the entire national-security team. One of the proudest moments of my life was to stand there in Al-Faw Palace and tell everyone that we’re coming—all our combat troops are coming home.”

Mr. Biden is trying to make a virtue out of a tragic strategic blunder. The total withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2011 set the stage for the rise of Islamic State, and the takeover of Mosul and much of Iraq by the “caliphate.” By 2014 U.S. forces were fighting again in Iraq, and it took five years to defeat the caliphate after the premature Obama-Biden withdrawal.

Mr. Biden will run on his foreign-policy chops, but on Iraq he supported the war, then turned against it when the going got tough, then opposed the 2007 Bush surge that finally won the war, then supported a withdrawal that let the enemy regroup. That isn’t a record to boast about.

 

Share

YOU CAN’T BLAME TRUMP FOR BALTIMORE’S FAILURE

Saturday, August 3rd, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

You Can’t Blame Trump for Baltimore’s Failure

Ineffective and dishonest politicians have used racism as a shield from criticism for half a century.

August 2, 2019   By Fred Siegel        Mr. Siegel is a contributing editor of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  Washington’s efforts to revive Baltimore have enriched local politicians but left the city in far worse shape than Mr. Rangel’s Harlem. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009—the Obama stimulus—poured $1.8 billion into Baltimore with no discernible effect. The 2015 antipolice riots made matters worse.

To make sense of President Trump’s dust-up with Rep. Elijah Cummings, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic Party, you have to go back to Baltimore in April 1968, when the city was overwhelmed by a riot in the wake of Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. The National Guard and city police proved unable to contain the situation. Mayor Tommy D’Alesandro III, Mrs. Pelosi’s elder brother, pleaded with President Lyndon B. Johnson to send in federal troops.

In 1968 Maryland hadn’t yet been absorbed by the wealth of Washington. It was still a semi-Southern state, lying below the Mason-Dixon Line. Republican Spiro Agnew—later Richard Nixon’s vice president—had been elected governor in 1966 over a segregationist Democratic nominee. In the black areas of West and East Baltimore, the King assassination triggered four days of rioting and looting.

The conflict was so fierce that the Baltimore police, 500 state troopers and 6,000 National Guardsmen were unable to quell it. Finally the “insurrection” was halted when Johnson deployed nearly 5,000 Army troops at Agnew’s request. By the time it was over, six people were dead. Mr. D’Alesandro, who had considered running for governor, was so humiliated by the rioting in a city where his father has been mayor before him that he decided to withdraw from elective politics.

Earlier that year, the Johnson administration reluctantly released the report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, commonly known as the Kerner Commission. The report wasn’t to LBJ’s liking because it implied that his Great Society was an insignificant down payment on racial redress. The presidential panel—assembled to explain the 1967 race riots in Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles and Newark, N.J.—should have been called the Lindsay Commission, after its vice chairman, New York Mayor John Lindsay. America’s racial problems, the report claimed, could be singularly attributed to white racism: “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal.”

Over time, the Kerner Commission’s view of racism became gospel in the media, academia and the Democratic Party. An intellectual Iron Curtain descended to protect black politicians—including ineffective ones like Mr. Cummings and even con men like the Rev. Al Sharpton—by denouncing their critics as racist.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – ELITES VERSUS MIDDLE AMERICA

Sunday, July 28th, 2019

 

One of the most hopeful and inspiring speeches I’ve ever heard. I guarantee you won’t regret the 20 minutes it takes.

Senator Hawley’s keynote at the National Conservatism Conference

10,899 views

Published on Jul 17, 2019

This week Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) delivered a speech at the National Conservatism Conference where he discussed the state of American politics today. Senator Hawley also addressed the growing divide between cosmopolitan elites and the rest of America and the need for policies geared toward the great American middle.

 

 

Share

WHAT IS CAUSING THE VIOLENCE ? CULTURAL MARXISM

Saturday, July 20th, 2019

 

Today’s decay of our traditional values  is causing all this violence and  is the direct result of Cultural Marxism whose main goal is to undermine and weaken our country.  This is a great article by Walter Williams on how our values and traditions used to be and how today’s behavior would be unthinkable to our past generations.    Nancy

Things Haven’t Always Been This Way

Walter E. Williams @WE_Williams /  July 17, 2019

Here’s a suggestion. How about setting up some high school rifle clubs? Students would bring their own rifles to school, store them with the team coach and, after classes, collect them for practice.

You say: “Williams, you must be crazy! To prevent gun violence, we must do all we can to keep guns out of the hands of kids.”

There’s a problem with this reasoning. Prior to the 1960s, many public high schools had shooting clubs.

In New York City, shooting clubs were started at Boys, Curtis, Commercial, Manual Training, and Stuyvesant high schools. Students carried their rifles to school on the subway and turned them over to their homeroom or gym teacher. Rifles were retrieved after school for target practice.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

In some rural areas across the nation, there was a long tradition of high school students hunting before classes and storing their rifles in the trunks of their cars, parked on school grounds, during the school day.

Today, any school principal permitting rifles clubs or allowing rifles on school grounds would be fired, possibly imprisoned.

Here’s my question: Have .30-30 caliber Winchesters and .22 caliber rifles changed to become more violent? If indeed rifles have become more violent, what can be done to pacify them? Will rifle psychiatric counseling help to stop these weapons from committing gun violence?

You say: “Williams, that’s lunacy! Guns are inanimate objects and as such cannot act.”

You’re right. Only people can act. That means that we ought to abandon the phrase “gun violence” because guns cannot act and hence cannot be violent.

If guns haven’t changed, it must be that people, and what’s considered acceptable behavior, have changed. Violence with guns is just a tiny example.

What explains a lot of what we see today is growing cultural deviancy.

(more…)

Share

WHITE HOUSE PETITION – IN SUPPORT OF THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION BEING ON THE 2020 CENSUS

Saturday, July 6th, 2019
Please consider signing this petition to the White House in favor of the citizenship question being on the 2020 census.   Please share with your email lists.   Nancy

 

Share
Search All Posts
Categories