Further Clarification on the Disintegration of America

Much of the public is too busy earning an income and raising their family - or, if they don't have one, having fun with their friends, or cavorting around the globe - and don't really pay much attention to what's coming down the road, or, in this case... the tracks.

Thanks to the Obama administration's eight years, he was correct when B. Hussain O. said to a large cheering crowd on October 31, 2007, "We are five days away from fundament-ally transforming the United States of America!"

America has changed, but not for the better. It is rapidly turning into a modified form of McCarthyism.

A person can be alleged to have been a spy for a foreign power, based on intelligence - which requires no verification because it's secret information - and thus there's no evidence  to support such an allegation, and have his character and life ruined in the media because it serves the leftist's agenda of hopefully correcting what the leftists thought was going to happen in the 2016 election, but didn't; Hillary Clinton getting elected to the presidency. 

So, now they've pursued their style of McCarthyism against Trump and his vague and of no significance during his campaign and early presidency to try getting him impeached.

Victor Davis Hansen has written an article much more eloquently than I could, and claims there is a legal and constitutional "train wreck", or day of reckoning, come soon. 

To add to this insanity, four Republican Congressmen have voted for a bill which will protect Robert Mueller from being fired by the President! Another example of how the President's powers are being stripped from him. Did they try anything like this on B. Hussein O. when he was President?

I urge you to read it to better understand why I assert that Obama's administration during his two terms was successful in disintegrating, or deteriorating, the basis upon which this country was made great.

Guns In Schools - The Debate Rages On

 I've addressed this issue in a few of my previous posts here, but this debate seems to have taken on a life of its own.

Background: As a retired teacher in public schools for 30 years, I have what liberals would consider a very odd view on this issue. In my late 20s after only being in the profession a short time, I started out getting involved in the teacher's union since my state has a law which requires new entries into any public school to become a dues paying union member. (Please, be patient, I will get to the guns in a bit.)

This irritated me, so, I felt I should at least be involved at the local level so I could better understand what the union was doing for me in exchange for taking monthly dues from my income.

In the second year of my involvement I decided to attend the NEA's national convention in Minneapolis, MN as an alternate delegate from my state. I went with the expectation that I would be spending time learning how I could be a better instructor; improve my teaching skills. 

Yet, for one day's morning time on the floor of the convention with delegates from all states and territories, the discussion was on what should be in a letter to then Pres. Reagan chastising him for funding the Contras in Nicaragua. 

It was at this point that I knew what the purpose of the teacher's union was; exercise political clout.

My next revelation as to their political agenda was when the sign at the entrance to my elementary school's parking lot from the main road at the front was posted. It read, "Gun Free Zone".

Having recently lost my brother to a gang member with a gun, I understood all too well just how vulnerable this sign made me feel. 

I was a defenseless individual who had a concealed carry permit - that's right, I'm a law abiding, second amendment rights citizen exercising his ability unlike the individual who killed my brother - and knew how to use it, but I couldn't, or I risked being fired immediately for defending myself and my students.

So, after so many events of school mass shooting over the course of the rest of my career, I had to just pray that nothing ever happened in my school.

Now, after being retired for several years, the Parkland, FL incident has brought the issue to the front burner in the social media arena and we see articles popping up here and there almost every day. Here are only a couple of examples.

Our state governor has now gone as far as saying, "We are not going to have second graders packing on the hip at school." or something close to this, as if to make jest that such a proposal was being made. And the reason why is, the WEA and the NEA are going to fight this sensible measure to stop mass killings where everyone's like fish in a barrel, with every ounce of fight they've got in them!

Honestly, I doubt I'll see any serious legislation by Congress on this topic before I die. And that's why, sadly, more young students will die needlessly.

Bottom Up, Top Down, Inside Out

That phrase is what revolutionaries understand as the way in which they are working their social manipulation through the media for the purpose of steadily, but persistently, shift the attitude of youth to believe that being a social justice warrior is "cool" and "virtuous".

Here's what I'm talking about. Watch this four minute video from MRCTV and think about it. I don't believe I need to say anything further about it since any sane individual who watches it will understand instinctively what's happening here.

What Our Leaders in D.C. Are Ignoring About Gun Control

There have been millions of people Killed because they were unable to protect themselves.  

Why Grandpa Carries A Gun

The quintessential reason why Grandpa carries a gun.Please take time to read this and pay particular attention to, "A Little Gun History," about half way down . . . staggering numbers!

Why Carry a Gun?

My old Grandpa said to me, "Son, there comes a time in every man's life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps, and usually it's when he becomes too old to take a whoopin'."

I don't carry a gun to kill people; I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don't carry a gun because I'm evil; I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the World.

I don't carry a gun because I hate government; I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don't carry a gun because I'm angry; I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don't carry a gun to shoot someone; I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow.

I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man; I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate; I carry a gun because, unarmed and facing an armed thug, I am inadequate.

I don't carry a gun because I love it; I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron: Free citizens must protect themselves because police do not protect you from crime; they just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take a whoopin'!


"A LITTLE GUN HISTORY"

PLEASE DON'T THINK FOR A MOMENT, THAT THIS COULDN'T HAPPEN IN OUR COUNTRY ALSO !!!!!!

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control:From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control:From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up/exterminated.
-----------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938:From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------
China established gun control in 1935:From 1948 to 1952, 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up/exterminated.
-----------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964:From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayans, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up/exterminated.
-----------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970:From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up/exterminated.
-----------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956:From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up/exterminated.
-----------------------
56 million defenseless people were rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.
-----------------------
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians discussing disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

With guns, we are 'citizens'; without them, we can easily become 'subjects'.

During WW II, the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

Gun owners in the USA are the largest armed force in the World!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense.

The sword is more important than the shield and skill is most important.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES A GUN TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD! SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT ISSUES AND TRAINS EVERY ADULT IN THE USE OF A RIFLE.

SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!

IT'S A NO BRAINER! DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS EASY TARGETS.

I'm a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment! If you are too, please forward this. If you're not a believer, please reconsider the true facts. This is history; not what's being shown on TV, sanctioned by many of our most illustrious, delusional leaders in Washington.

This should go for Grandmas as well.

The Electoral College - A Good, or Bad Idea?

Over the past year or so since the 2016 election we've heard liberals pushing for eliminating the Electoral College in the voting process because, some claim, it's unfair, undemocratic, or just plain out dated. Really? Let's examine this with facts...

Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories. - Thomas Jefferson

In their infinite wisdom, the Founding Fathers of the newly formed United States created the Electoral College to ensure that each and every state in the union was fairly represented; that called a Federal Republic. While we have incorporated some aspects of a democracy, it isn't a pure one. As the old saying goes, a true democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. Yet this form of democracy is what Democrats are calling for. So, why should one or two states which are densely populated dictate the outcome of the entire country?

The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet. Is should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College is so important to our Federal Republic and makes sense.

• There are 3,141 counties in the United States.
• Trump won 3,084 of them.
• Clinton won 57.
• There are 62 counties in New York State.
• Trump won 46 of them.
• Clinton won 16.
• Clinton won the popular vote by approximately 1.5 million votes. (She continues to harp on this point alone.)
• In the 5 counties the encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties, while Trump won only Richmond.)
• Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton's winning the popular vote of the entire country.
• These 5 counties comprise only 319 square miles of land area.
• The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles of land area.
• When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Yet, the Democrats do!
• Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our entire nation!

And... it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation's problems come from.

Another Step Nearer the Abyss

Most people - those who don't have a fortune of billions - do what it takes on a year-to-year basis to improve their financial lot in life; working hard, taking classes to improve their skill set, going the "extra mile" to prove to their boss that they deserve the promotion they so desperately need. These people know well the importance of living within their means; well, at least some of them who have a grasp on basic laws of finance and budgeting.

The growing credit debt today has rapidly increased due to greater consumer purchasing with their "miracle plastic". It creates a temporary good feeling for most when they can get that item they "must have"; flat screen television, video console, etc. However, when the monthly statement comes the shock of the total owed instantly returns them to the reality for which only they are responsible; increased debt. Living within our means today seems to no longer be important as a responsibility because too many parents never bothered teaching their children any basic concepts about finances and budgeting.

However, this is also true at the international banking level of finance. The U.S. Treasury, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank have, for many years, essentially done the same thing, and once again this year, have continued the practice of increasing their allotment of funds beyond what is actually available in order to try and stem the problem funding poorer nations who depend on their loans. This is done not because any parent failed to teach them basics, but because they were forced to get creative with their policies of finance when forced to make a tough decision, and they made a poor choice which ignored the laws of economics.

Here's my question... How well did Pres. Johnson's establishment of the Welfare Act of 1964 work for eliminating poverty in the U.S. after five decades and several billions of dollars spent on giving subsistence to low skilled individuals? Answer.... it HASN'T!!! And now, further down the road of time, our own country's policy is to continue passing bills which further extend our national debt. (Recall the most recent Omnibus Bill which added another $1.2 TRILLION.)

With the U.S. continuously increasing its own debt - 21 TRILLION and climbing - and other nations around the globe with their own debts, anyone who understands that the laws of economics can not be ignored for long - just like the individual can't ignore their credit card debt forever - I believe the global economy is eventually going to have a "day of reckoning" where the whole system collapses and the whole planet goes into a financial Armageddon.

Henry Kissinger On President Trump

Agree or not, this is an interesting observation by a seasoned observer who understands international relations well. This appears to be an interesting collection of comments by Henry Kissinger on Donald Trump's political maneuverings as president. Using Google I've found bits of what follows, including a CBS interview, some of which is quoted here. I can't vouch for the whole collection, but it doesn't appear to be implausible based upon the pieces I've located.
= = = = = = = = = = =
Kissinger on Trump

Recently, Henry Kissinger did an interview and said some very amazing things regarding President Trump. He starts with: "Donald Trump is phenomenon that foreign countries haven't seen."

The former Secretary of State Henry Kissenger gives us a new understanding of President Trump's foreign policy and predicts its success:

Liberals and those who favor (Hillary) Clinton will never admit it. They will never admit that he is the one true leader. The man doing changes like never before and does it all for the sake of the nation's people. After eight years of tyranny, we finally see the difference.

Kissinger knows it and he continues with:

Every country now has to consider two things: One, their perception that the previous president, or the outgoing president, basically withdrew America from international politics, so that they had to make their own assessments of their necessities. And secondly, that there is a new president who's asking a lot of unfamiliar questions. And because of the combination of the partial vacuum and the new questions, one could imagine that something remarkable and new emerges out of it.

Then, Kissinger puts it bluntly: 

Trump puts America and its people first. This is why people love him and this is why he will remain in charge for so long. There is not a single thing wrong with him and people need to open their eyes.

When he boasts that he has a "bigger red button" than Kim Jung Un does, he so transcends the mealy-mouthed rhetoric of the past that he forces a new recognition of American power. Kissinger once wrote, "The weak grow strong by effrontery. The strong grow weak through inhibition." No statement better captures the U.S.-North Korea relationship.

Trump is discarding the inhibitions and calling the bluff on North Korea's effrontery.

His point is that the contrast of American retreat under Obama and its new assertion of power under Trump creates a new dynamic that every one of our allies and of our enemies must consider. Our allies grew complacent with Obama's passivity and now are fearful due to Trump's activism. And they must balance the two in developing their policies. They realize that the old assumptions, catalyzed by Bush 43's preoccupation with Iraq and Obama's refusal to lead are obsolete. So, Trump is forcing a new calculus with a new power behind American interests.

Those - here and abroad - who rode the old apple cart worry about its being toppled. But, as Kissinger so boldly states, Trump "is one true leader" in world affairs and he is forcing policy changes that put America first.