Archive for the ‘President Ronald Reagan’ Category

VIDEO – AGENDA GRINDING AMERICA DOWN – FULL DOCUMENTARY MOVIE

Thursday, August 20th, 2020

 

I first saw this documentary film about 7 or so years ago and  was mesmerized because it stated quite clearly all the things I believed were  happening to our country.  Today,  it is even clearer that the Communists, Socialists and Progressives are a powerful force that are shaping events in our country.  In order to stop this destruction of our culture and our country, we first have to understand why and how it is being accomplished and this movie explains  it all  for us.     Please share this movie with your email lists.  Nancy  P.S.  Be sure not to miss the final 5  minutes of this film 
AGENDA GRINDING AMERICA DOWN  – FULL DOCUMENTARY MOVIE
#AGENDA Grinding America Down FULL MOVIE, BEST #DOCUMENTARY Ted Baehr, MovieGuide ​”AGENDA is the most powerful expose of the communist, socialist, progressive attempt to take over America produced so far.” DAVID & JASON BENHAM “The most eye opening documentary we’ve ever seen! You have to see this film!” If you have ever wondered what the Occupy Wall Street movement was all about, check this out. This documentary puts all the pieces together.
Share

VIOLENT PROTEST AND THE INTELLIGENTSIA

Wednesday, June 10th, 2020

 

This interview with a professor of Russian literature points out some of the similarities between what is happening in America today and conditions in Czarist Russia right before the Russian Revolution.   Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
VIOLENT PROTEST AND THE INTELLIGENTSIA
An Interview with Gary Saul Morson, A professor of Russian Literature at Northwestern University,    by Barton Swaim  Mr. Swaim is an editorial page writer for the Journal.
June  7, 2020
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: In late czarist Russia, some political parties and other groups—the Social Democrats, the anarchists, the Marxists—explicitly endorsed terrorism. “The liberal party—the Constitutional Democrats, they called themselves—did not condone terrorism,” Mr. Morson says. “But they refused to condemn it. And indeed they called for the release from prison of all terrorists, who were pledged to continue terrorism right away. . . . A famous line from one of the liberal leaders put it this way: ‘Condemn terrorism? That would be the moral death of the party.’ ”

The similarities between this week’s riots and the Los Angeles riots of 1992 are obvious. Both were occasioned by appalling video images, and both divided the nation along partisan and ideological lines. The differences between the two events, however, are more revealing. The violence in 1992 came after a court verdict; the beating and arrest of Rodney King had happened more than a year before. This year’s riots came within days of George Floyd’s killing by Minneapolis officers. The riots of 1992 were mostly confined to poor and working-class areas of Los Angeles. This week saw mayhem all over America, and in Los Angeles, New York and elsewhere the rioters targeted wealthy streets and neighborhoods.

But perhaps the most striking difference is the rationalization, and sometimes full-throated defense, of violence from left-wing elites: the glorification of havoc, the vilification of cops and their middle-class admirers, highfalutin defenses of vandalism. The sense of revolution and class warfare was everywhere this week: the cognoscenti and underclass arrayed against the petty bourgeois shop owners; the elite and those they claim to represent against everybody else.

Gary Saul Morson says he has no special insight regarding police actions and the death of George Floyd. But he does have a provocative thesis about America’s current political moment: “To me it’s astonishingly like late 19th-, early 20th-century Russia, when basically the entire educated class felt you simply had to be against the regime or some sort of revolutionary.”

Mr. Morson, 72, is a professor of Russian literature at Northwestern University and an accomplished interpreter of Fyodor Dostoevsky, Anton Chekhov and Leo Tolstoy. Obviously we haven’t arrived at anything like what Lenin called a “revolutionary situation,” Mr. Morson says, but we have arrived at a situation in which well-intentioned liberal people often can’t bring themselves to say that lawless violence is wrong.

Share

VIDEO MEMORIAL DAY TRIBUTE

Monday, May 25th, 2020

 

VIDEO  MEMORIAL DAY TRIBUTE 
Share

SOCIALISM STRIKES BACK

Wednesday, February 12th, 2020

 

A personal note:  I agree with the author of this article.  I first visited  the Soviet Union in 1982.  Three of the photos I took on the street of the ordinary people were very telling.  One was of an elderly woman selling a few shriveled up cucumbers on the street, another was an elderly woman sweeping the city sidewalk with her broom and the third photo was a truck parked on the street laden with bricks. A man was standing by the side of the truck obviously watching that the three elderly women loaded the bricks quickly and correctly !  In sharp contrast was the magnificent subway system with huge photos of Lenin adorning the walls attesting to the glory of Communism.   
On my second trip to what was then called Russia in 1994 after the Berlin Wall had come down and the Soviet Union was dissolved.  My late husband who was working in Moscow for an international company at the time.  He was tied up and robbed in his hotel room at the Metropol  Hotel.  Also,  I had wanted to go back and revisit a wonderful restaurant that I had been to in 1982 but our company security  people told us it was no longer safe to go there as the restaurant  was now controlled by the Russian Mafia.  An American couple that we knew  who were also working in Moscow, bought an apartment and completely gutted and remodeled it. Their apartment was very lovely inside but because of the housing shortage, other apartments in their  building were crowded with many Russian people living in each apartment that had one bathroom.  Trying to put this delicately, let’s just say you had to be very careful where you stepped in the hallways !!!!   Oh, one more  thing, if driving in their chaotic traffic, definitely do not get stopped by the traffic  police for any minor offense,   as they will demand money from you.
  On a more positive note, their  museums and arts were world class.  The Hermitage Museum has more Rembrandts than the Metropolitan Museum  in New York !
God forbid that Bernie becomes president !!!  Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Socialism Strikes Back

Before many Sanders voters were born, I saw his ideology in action in the Soviet Union and Britain.

By George Melloan    Mr. Melloan is a former deputy editor of the Journal editorial page. His book about the costs of bogus science will be published in August by Lyons Press.
February 5, 2020

Socialist Bernie Sanders’s emergence as a front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination is puzzling to many of us who have experienced socialism. We thought it dead—good riddance—when the Soviet empire collapsed 30 years ago. Our mistake.

One can only assume that the hardships endured by many millions of Russians, Chinese, Africans and Europeans have been forgotten, or never learned, by a new generation of Democratic voters. Mr. Sanders says he is a “democratic socialist,” whereas those unfortunates of the past were ruled by “communists.” He’s right that there are wide differences in degree. But although the postwar British Labour Party was freely elected, it brought Brits a more limited degree of the economic stagnation that afflicted the people of the undemocratic Soviet Union and its satellites.

(more…)

Share

FANTASTIC NEW TRUMP VIDEO

Wednesday, February 12th, 2020

Share

WILL THE 20’S ROAR AGAIN ?

Saturday, January 4th, 2020
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Will the ’20s Roar Again?

We are overdue today for another wave of creative thinking about everything—politics, the culture, education and morality. But this time, hold the roaring.

By Daniel Henninger January 2, 2020

If time travel were real, nearly half the U.S. population—and all the Democrats—would ship Donald Trump back to the Roaring ’20s, an era presumably more in sync with his instinct for creative outrage. But voters then would have been as startled by Mr. Trump’s political personality as voters now. Despite the dawn of the Flapper Age, their taste in presidents ran more toward Warren G. Harding, elected in 1920, whom no one would mistake for Donald J. Trump.

Harding’s campaign slogan was “a return to normalcy.” When he died in office 2½ years later, his successor was the uber-normal Calvin Coolidge, who won election on his own in 1924.

Other than the American presidency, though, the 1920s were in no way normal. In the U.S. and much of the world, the decade witnessed a remarkable economic and industrial boom. If we’re going to compare the ’20s then to the ’20s being born this week, an economic footnote is in order about a main cause of the first “roaring.”

When the 16th Amendment created the personal income tax in 1913, the original top marginal rate was 7%. By 1920 it was 77%, in part because of the Great War.

At the urging of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, Congress enacted tax cuts in 1921, 1924 and 1926, with the top rate falling in middle-decade to 25% on incomes above $100,000. Prosperity followed, just as it did after the Kennedy tax cuts in the 1960s, Reagan’s reductions in the 1980s, and today—undeniably—after the Trump corporate rate cut of 2017. As in the 1920s, the consumer is again king, with disposable income available to buy an innovative economy’s extraordinary array of new products.

Pessimists say the Great Depression silenced the 1920s’ roar. It did, and some of its lessons deserve mention.

(more…)

Share

U.S. FINANCING CHINA’S WORLD DOMINATION PLANS

Friday, November 15th, 2019

 

This is an article you have to read as there is so much new information in it regarding China and how our financial markets are being used to finance China’s expansion of their technological and military advances.  Nancy
IMPRIMIS – HILLSDALE COLLEGE

Why and How the U.S. Should Stop Financing China’s Bad Actors

October 2019  • Volume 48, Number 10 • Roger W. Robinson, Jr.

Roger W. Robinson, Jr.
Chairman, Prague Security Studies Institute

Roger W. Robinson, Jr. is president and CEO of RWR Advisory Group and co-founder and chairman of the Prague Security Studies Institute. He earned a B.A. from Duke University and an M.A. from George Washington University. He served as senior director of international economic affairs on President Reagan’s National Security Council, where he was the principal architect of the secret economic and financial strategy that proved decisive to the defeat of the Soviet Union. He later served as chairman of the Congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Prior to his government service, he was a vice president in the international department of the Chase Manhattan Bank.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College on September 9, 2019, during a conference on the topic, “Understanding China.”

In the early 1980s, I served on President Reagan’s National Security Council. Prior to my time at the White House, I was a vice president at Chase Manhattan Bank, in charge of its USSR and Eastern Europe division. It was my job to assess the creditworthiness of the countries in that part of the world, and I had come to realize that the Soviet Union had relatively modest hard currency income—and that what little it had came largely from the West.

In 1982, the Soviets had an empire stretching from Havana to Hanoi, but their hard currency revenue totaled only about $32 billion a year—roughly one-third the annual revenue of General Motors at the time. They were spending about $16 billion more annually than they were making, with the funding gap—the USSR’s life support—being financed by Western governments and banks.

President Reagan had long believed that the Soviet Union was economically vulnerable, because he knew it lacked the entrepreneurship, technological dynamism, and freedoms that are the prerequisites of a strong modern economy. And when he learned that we in the West were financing its brutal regime, he committed to slowing, and ultimately terminating, that flow of discretionary cash.

Our European allies had a completely different approach. Their belief in Ostpolitik, as the Germans called it, presupposed that commercial bridge-building would lead to geopolitical cooperation. If the West would offer financing and trade with the Soviets, peace and prosperity would result. Meanwhile, the Soviets were using the proceeds of Western loans, hard currency revenue streams, and technological support to build up their military, expand their empire, and engage in anti-Western activities.

The Reagan administration drew the line on a project called the Siberian Gas Pipeline, a 3,600-mile twin-strand pipeline that stretched from Siberia into the Western European gas grid. If completed, not only would it become the centerpiece of the Soviets’ hard currency earnings structure, but Western Europe would become dependent on the USSR for over 70 percent of its natural gas, weakening Western Europe’s ties to the U.S. and leaving the continent open to Kremlin extortion. Moreover, the pipeline was being financed on taxpayer-subsidized terms, since France and Germany viewed the USSR as a less developed country worthy of below-market interest rates.

The U.S. at the time had a monopoly on oil and gas technology that could drill through permafrost—which we had developed for Alaska’s North Slopeand we imposed oil and gas equipment sanctions on the USSR and European companies that were helping to build the Siberian pipeline. At one point, despite the strain it placed on relations with our NATO allies, we closed the U.S. market entirely to companies that continued to supply the pipeline project over our objections. Four of the six affected companies went under within six months, and Europeans woke up to the fact that they could do business with us or the Soviets, but not both.

As a result of these efforts we capped Soviet gas deliveries to Western Europe at 30 percent of total supplies, delayed the first strand of the pipeline by years and killed the second strand, and eventually helped dry up the bulk of Western credits to the USSR. In a secret deal, we also persuaded the Saudis to pump an additional two million barrels of oil per day and decontrolled prices at the wellhead in this country, knocking oil prices down to about $10 a barrel—significant because for every dollar decrease in the price of a barrel, the Soviets lost some 500 million to one billion dollars. In short, the Soviet Union never recovered from these economic and financial blows. It defaulted on some $96 billion in Western hard currency debt shortly before the total collapse of the Soviet empire.

The story with China today has certain similarities, but with one big difference: the U.S. has been playing the role of the naïve Europeans. Since adopting the Kissinger policy of engaging with China in the 1970s, our government has operated on the assumption that economic and financial relations with China would lead Beijing to liberalize politically. And since 2001, when we backed China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, the pace at which we have given China access to our best technology and capital and trade markets has accelerated. Yet China has shown no signs of embracing individual freedoms or the rule of law.

Instead, with our support, the Chinese have launched a massive campaign to become the world’s leading superpower. We know about the “Belt and Road Initiative,” a strategic undertaking to place huge segments of the world under China’s influence or outright control. We know about “Made in China 2025,” a strategy designed to dominate key technology sectors—from artificial intelligence and quantum computing to hypersonic missiles and 5G. We know about China’s practice of forced technology transfers: requiring American companies to share their trade secrets and R&D in order to do business in China. We know about China’s predatory trade practices. We know many of these things only because President Trump has brought them to the forefront of national attention, for which he deserves credit. And the ongoing tariff war is a good thing in the sense that we’ve finally begun to take a stand.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM EXPLAINED

Thursday, August 1st, 2019

 

This is an excellent video that explains exactly how  Democratic Socialism,  Socialism, and Communism are all connected.   Dr. Kengor is speaking to a group of Young Americans  at the Reagan Ranch. Please share with your email lists.    Nancy   

VIDEO –  DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM EXPLAINED

Dr. Paul Kengor 

Biography
Paul Kengor
From your friends at the Institute for Faith and Freedom

PIG

 

What is “democratic socialism” and what makes it different than socialism or communism? In a speech at the Ronald Reagan Ranch in Santa Barbara, CA, Dr. Paul Kengor unpacks this complex leftist ideology, putting all the pieces on the table.

Click here to watch this video on our website to get the facts you need to have:

 

WATCH NOW!
 

Enjoy,

The Institute for Faith and Freedom

Share

VIDEO PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN’S MEMORIAL DAY SPEECH 1986

Tuesday, May 28th, 2019

 

VIDEO   PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN   MEMORIAL DAY SPEECH  1986 

Share

VIDEO – MARK LEVIN ON HANNITY – CORRUPTION

Monday, April 1st, 2019

 

VIDEO – MARK LEVIN ON SEAN HANNITY, FRIDAY, MARCH 29, 2019

Mark Levin gives a very informative history of how past  Democrat presidents (FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Johnson, Kennedy, and Obama  used their powers to spy on their political enemies by using the IRS, the Justice Department and the FBI.   He questions how it could be possible that Obama did not know that his people in the Justice Department, the FBI and the IRS (remember the IRS intimidating the tea party groups during the Obama Administration) were targeting  President Trump.    Mark Levin also  talks about the role that the media has played in covering up this  whole sordid coup against President Trump       Nancy
The Mark Levin segment on the Hannity video begins at 22:18
Share
Search All Posts
Categories