Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Mid-term Blues or Mid-term Surprise?


The media hype is focusing our nation on revisiting the kabuki theater of 25 years ago; Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill and the salacious sleaze that the left loves to use against anyone who threatens their grasp on power, while looking the other way when any of their own are exposed - a.k.a. rapist Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton or Ted Kennedy.


Only today it's Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford.

My question is, Why are the Democrats using this obvious tactic again when there are many voters who remember what went on not that long ago with Thomas and Hill?

I predict this move will backfire on them. The result will only be more voting to back those conservative candidates who are supportive of the president's agenda; improving the economy, lowering unemployment rates for all, and working to resolve long standing international issues which have been concerns for most Americans.

In case you don't believe me, just take a look at this article and go through it very carefully. Don't just skim through it, but actually check out what some of the links provide as proof and evidence of the impact Trump's policy of "Promises Made, Promises Kept" is doing to many former voters who didn't really know just how much they were being snookered by the Democrats for so long.

And finally, for those looking for the humorous side on this issue... see the image below.

Monday, September 17, 2018

Why We Must Stop Iran


Several past administrations have, for various reasons since the early 1980s, ignored in some fashion the threat and existence of a terrorist group in the middle-east which has grown stronger over the last forty years. Here is what the introductory statement from PragerU'S latest video presentation says:

When listing the world’s most notorious terrorist organizations, why is it that Al-Qaeda, ISIS and Boko Haram so quickly spring to mind, while Hezbollah is frequently forgotten? In this video, Tony Badran, Research Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explains how the backing of Iran has served to legitimize Hezbollah on the world stage, while simultaneously making the group all the more dangerous.

The latest previous administration, I believe, was attempting to help Iran achieve its goal of wiping out Israel by working out an arrangement to develop nuclear capability and provide them billions in cash on pallets in exchange for hostages.

Sunday, September 16, 2018

Clarity on Net Neutrality


With the cacophony of voices on the Internet about the proposal of net neutrality during the Obama Administration, for many the ability to understand exactly what it was about and would achieve, was confusing. (Isn't that what most leftists are striving to accomplish?)

Now, we finally have a presentation from PragerU which explains in a simple and clear way, just what this issue is really all about. If you're still uncertain, watch and more clearly understand the intent of this concept so you can decide.

Tuesday, September 4, 2018

Nike's Latest Ad Campaign


I believe that international corporatism is jumping on the "global bandwagon" to enhance their image to the youth of today. It helps them appear that they're "social justice warriors" too. I believe this is purely to enhance their sales volume and thus, profits. That is validated by the fact that they produce their product overseas in cheap labor countries, like China, in order to ship them into the U.S. and other wealthier countries, to harvest their profits. Of course, they have every right to do so, but this doesn't sit well with the leftists who are anti-oppression through taking advantage of cheap labor. Most international corporations, and this case especially Nike, is going to encounter an unexpected backlash from this ad campaign using this former 49er quarterback. (I refuse to use his name, thank you, as I'm personally offended by the fact that he has publicly stated that he thinks Castros' Cuba is a model society.)



Let's, for a moment, take a different view of this ad. His face fills the frame so close that, if one who views it doesn't know who this person is, might well think that this man is a middle-easterner (Palestinian or even a Muslim terrorist, perhaps.) After all, reading the sentence tends to lead one to think this remark is the rational behind why a terrorist or Palestinian fighting against Israel is why they do whatever they do.



While I can appreciate this story that one of my former Seattle Seahawks convinced him to kneel rather than sit on his ass to disrespect what so many have bled for,or died to protect as a symbol of our country and what it stands for, the gist of the story's ending essentially speaks to what liberals of the earlier days used to say, "I wholly disagree with what you are saying, but I will fight t the death your right to say it." Nike and this guy they're using to enhance their social message, I believe, would be hard pressed to agree with that saying which is no longer held. We can thank the former president for weaponizing politics to such a degree which it has become today for that.

And what's with this sacrifice stuff? Would someone please explain to me exactly what he's sacrificed? He was a backup quarterback who's career in his sport was going downhill already. (And please, don't tell me he wasn't picked up by another team because of his ethnicity when it seems that the majority of NFL players are of the same ethnicity. So, that ain't floatin' pal.) As Tara Kyle has adeptly pointed out this guy hasn't sacrificed like her husband, Chris, his brothers in arms, or herself is now after his death doing her best to  raise her two fatherless children. So, cut the bull crap with the faux hero image, Nike.

On Tucker Carlson's show tonight there was footage of people lighting their Nike shoes and shirts on fire in reaction to this ad. It has already been my personal conviction that I refuse to buy any clothing by any of the big lines - Nike, Under Armor, Addidas, etc. - in order to advertise for them. As far as I'm concerned, they should pay me a royalty to wear any of their logo enhanced product for advertising for them. No thanks!

Update: Here's an email just received - 9/06/18 - on this:

Jon,



In case you missed it, Nike is promoting National Anthem protestor, Colin Kaepernick in a new "Just Do It" ad about sacrifice.

Nike posted a picture of the controversial NFL player with the quote, "Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything."

This is disgraceful. It's a slap in the face by a leftist company to the millions of Americans who truly sacrificed everything serving their country. Ask Pat Tillman's family about what it means to sacrifice everything.

The truth is Colin Kaepernick doesn't understand a thing about sacrifice or he would get up off his knee and show some respect.

This is just one more example of gutless liberal left trying to force their values on a country that doesn't want them. We know what sacrifice is that's why we STAND for the national anthem.

Nike should be ashamed - Colin Kaepernick is an embarrassment to his country.

If you agree, take a stand by joining Great America PAC in BOYCOTTING Nike.

BOYCOTT NIKE
STATUS: INCOMPLETE

   JUST DO IT >  
Protesting the National Anthem due to personal politics is offensive enough, but Nike's willingness to glorify Kaepernick's self-inflicted backlash to "sacrificing everything" is downright despicable.

We cannot allow our P.C. culture continue down this path. The Left has gone from targeting free speech, to statues, and now to our national anthem and those who have fought for the very freedoms we enjoy today.

Enough is enough. Please take a stand today by joining our calls to boycott Nike.

Just do it -- join the BOYCOTT and STAND for American values.

Sincerely,

Great America PAC
Ed Rollins
Chairman, Great America PAC

Monday, September 3, 2018

Epilogue: Subverting the Rule of Law

The following is Gregg Jarrett's final chapter in his book, The Russian Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump. I include it here because it is a very well written summation of what this whole event- what Pres. Trump tweets is a "Witch Hunt" - is a window into how power corrupts and the nation suffers.


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

EPILOGUE

I am not a Trump apologist or sycophant. He will be the first to tell you that.

In the handful of conversations and meetings I have with the president over the past year, he gently reminded me of my earlier reporting that he regarded as negative or critical of him. He had a right to do so, and it was fair. Why, then, would I write a book that is, in large part, a defense of Trump?

In truth, this book is a defense of the rule of law. It came under sustained attack by high government officials who abused their positions of power to subvert our system of justice and undermine the democratic process. Trump was their target and their victim.

As facts emerged, I became incensed that top figures at the FBI and Department of Justice misconstrued the law in a manner that could only have been deliberate. They absolved Hillary Clinton of the felony statutes she so flagrantly violated. They weaponized other laws and regulations to investigate Trump without legal justification in an effort to destroy him.

The law is inviolate. If it is to function properly as the foundation of democracy, it must be fairly and equitably administered without favor regardless of politics and circumstances. This did not happen. When the legal system is corrupted, all Americans suffer. We lose confidence in our government of laws. As Adams warned, it becomes a government of men who empower themselves to transgress the very righst and liberties we cherish.

In this endeavor, the press plays a vital role. It is an indispensable check on excessive government authority. This is what the Framers envisioned when they embraced the First Amendment in our Bill of Rights. Sadly, it did not always occur in the reporting of of this story by mainstream media. All too often, journalists were complicit in advancing our excusing the abuse of power. They convicted Trump in the court of public opinion without evidence cognizable in law. This is another reason why I decided to write this book.

Fueled by the FBI's unwarranted investigation, reporters became advocates. They condemned Trump for the least infraction and inflated any encounter with persons connected, however tangentially, to Russia. Many in the media, motivated by their own bias, drove the constant narrative that Trump and those in his orbit "colluded" with Moscow to steal the 2016 presidential election from Clinton. When the new president fired FBI James Comey, the action was immediately interpreted and portrayed by the press as irrefutable proof of obstruction of justice.

Some journalists accused Trump of being "Putin's puppet" or "a de facto agent" of the Kremlin. Articles were published implying that Trump was a "Manchurian candidate." The unfairness of the media was palpable. Rank speculation was treated as fact. Stories were agenda-driven, not information-driven. Indictment and impeachment were persistent themes in both print and television news. At every turn, the media demonized the president by declaring him guilty of the conjured crime of "collusion." It became the favored truncheon.

Examples of this abound. When Trump's lawyer, Jay Sekulow, was interviewed on ABC News by anchor George Stephanopoulos, the following exchange took place about a Trump adviser who spoke to a person with Russian contacts:
SEKULOW: There is no crime of "collusion." What is a violation of law here?
STEPHANOUPOLOS: Collusion is cooperation!
 Viewers were left with the impression that the act of talking with someone constituted "collusion," which equaled the commission of a crime. Yet, there was no evidence of a secret agreement to achieve some fraudulent or illegal purpose. It was all too easy for the anchor to insinuate a crime by using a word that connotes a crime. The appearance of criminality seemed sufficient for many reporters.
CARL BERNSTEIN (ON CNN): I think this is a potentially more dangerous situation than Watergate. We're at a dangerous moment. And that's because we are looking at the possibility that the president of the United States and those around him during an election campaign colluded with a hostile foreign power to undermine the basis of our democracy-free elections.
DAN RATHER (ON MSNBC): Donald Trump is afraid. He's trying to exude power and strength.He's afraid of something that Mueller and the prosecutors are going to find out. A political hurricane is out there at sea for him. We'll call it Hurricane Vladamir, if you will, the whole Russian thing. It is approaching Category Four.
JAKE TAPPER (CNN ANCHOR): This is evidence of willingness to commit collusion. That's what this is on its face.
LAWRENCE O'DONNELL (MSNBC HOST): Donald Trump now sits at the threshold of impeachment.
These were, by no means, the only instances in which the media proclaimed Trump and his associates culpable of criminal "collusion." One anchor averred with certainty, "they're confessing to colluding with the Russians." Another speculated that "people might go to jail for the rest of their lives." Still another insisted that "they're acting super guilty because they're guilty." But guilty of what specifically? That vexing tidbit of information was conveniently omitted.

Throughout the Trump presidency, the media has obsessed over "collusion" without defining it. They assumed it was a crime that surely must exist buried somewhere in the vast body of dusty law books. One anchor became so giddy over the prospect of Trump's arrest, she fantasized on air about the day he would barricade himself inside the White House as federal marshals banged on the door to take him into custody. The president's imminent demise became daily fodder.

There has been no shortage of media  malpractice in the age of Trump. Motivated by political bias and personal animus, some journalists were relentless in their quest to prove the president's illegitimacy and drive him from office. They abandoned objectivity and suspended their sense of fairness. They allowed enmity to cloud their judgement. In the process, the media squandered credibility, its only currency. It is  no wonder that many Americans have little trust in journalists to be honest in their reporting.

The people who should read this book, probably won't. Democrats, the liberal media, and the legion of Trump-haters have convinced themselves that his election was misbegotten. But they are intellectually dishonest in believing that the president must have committed some crime with Russia. Most have never bothered to examine the facts or consult a statute. Their confidence in "collusion" is bereft of proof. They accept it as a matter of faith driven by their own bias, and teased by hope out of ignorance.

I have no illusion that what I have written in these pages will persuade them otherwise. The anti-Trump crowd is so adamant in their disdain that no amount of reason will reach them. Yet, they are equally blind to the astonishing level of corruption by those in government who sought to sabotage the president with false claims and drive him from office. Individuals who are sworn to uphold the law manipulated it for their own partisan purpose. Their self-righteous compulsion to correct what they perceived to be wrong in the electioin of Trump serves as the quintessential example of the arrogance of power.

It has been both challenging and frustrating to compose a book as event were still unfolding. It was akin to the struggle of keeping pace with a fast-moving train. There will be more revelations to come, as the Justice Department examines the venal conduct of those who cleared Clinton and targeted Trump. It may take months, if not years, before a true accounting is divulged. This is how cover-ups work. The truth is slow to emerge. Until then, the story told here presents more than sufficient facts for the reader to reach the inexorable conclusion that Trump was a victim, not the villain.

There was never any plausible evidence that Trump or his campaign collaborated with Russia to win the presidency. The FBI had no legal basis to initiate its investigation. Facts were invented or exaggerated. Laws were perverted or ignored. The law enforcers became law breakers. Comey's scheme to trigger the appointment of his friend as special counsel was a devious maneuver by an unscrupulous man. His instinuation that the president obstructed justice was another canard designed to inflame the liberal media. Sure enough, they became witting accessories.

When powerful forces in government abuse their positions of trust to subvert the legal process,and when the media acts in concert to condone or conceal corrupt behavior, democracy is threatened. Revernce to the rule of law is lost.

This is the story of The Russia Hoax.

Footnote: As some will have learned, new disclosure has surfaced about Hillary Clinton's email server having been hacked by China.

Sunday, September 2, 2018

Saturday, September 1, 2018

Initiative 1639 - by Chris W. Cox, NRA


Fairfax, Va. - On behalf of Washingtonians and the National Rifle Association for Freedom, the National Rifle Association launched an informational website. Initiative1639.org exposes how this extreme gun-control ballot initiative will add new restrictions on the exercise of Second Amendment rights, regulate ordinary, recreational guns in common use as “assault” weapons, drive up the costs of being a gun owner, and allow the government to authorize the surrender and confiscation of firearms as part of a verification process, all without doing anything to meaningfully address violent crime in Washington State.
"Law -abiding gun owners in Washington State need to understand the impact I-1639 will have on their Second Amendment right to self-defense," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action." The NRA’s new website, Initiative1639.org provides the facts on how this gun-control initiative will infringe on law-abiding citizens’ constitutional rights and make it more difficult to protect themselves and their families."
Highlights of the extreme gun-control provisions in I-1639 include:

  • Classifying ordinary, recreational rifles in common use as "assault" weapons;
  • Imposing age-based gun purchase and possession bans on law-abiding adults, including a prohibition on adults aged 18-20 acquiring or purchasing semi-automatic rifles classified as "assault" weapons;
  • Introducing new storage requirements that impede the use of guns for lawful self-defense and punish gun owners for the acts of criminals;
  • Imposing a new $25 fee on sales and transfers of all guns that fall within the new definition of "assault" weapons;
  • Allowing the government to establish a “verification” process to enforce compliance and authorize confiscation of firearms, based on the mandatory disclosure of information from gun retailers and gun owners. [Emphasis mine.]
Initiative1639.org makes it easy for voters to stay informed, register to vote, volunteer their time, and download material that highlights their opposition to this latest Seattle-inspired gun grab.
"It’s not enough to exercise your rights - you need to protect them at the ballot box. I encourage Washingtonians who value their Second Amendment rights to visit Initiative1639.org and find out how they can join the fight to protect their rights," Cox concluded.
Paid for by Washingtonians and the National Rifle Association for Freedom, 11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 Pursuant to WAC 390-18-025(1), the Top Five Contributors are: National Rifle Association of America

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America's oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook and Twitter @NRA.