After several politicians attacked Donald Trump for not being a conservative during the CBS debate on Saturday February 13th 2016, have a look at the facts percolating from history. Ted Cruz was about 4 years old in 1988 and Jeb Bush was still trying to leave his mother’s side. Marco Rubio was playing in coloring books and John Kasich was still trying to figure out if he was a democrat or something else. Yet Trump, who at the time had no real desire to be President of the United States was on top of the world and had done what many thought was impossible. Well, here is a video from CNN with Trump talking about being a personal guest to the GOP convention of the Bush family and talking about why he was a Republican.
Pass this video around to your friends this week when those struggling establishment politicians try to say that Trump is not a conservative. The Bush family may be nice but they screwed up the economy and the whole situation in Iraq. They brought us Clinton and the debacles that followed. Trump had a reason to withdraw his support from the Bush family. He knew them personally, and they let him down. The evidence is in these videos.
Share this with everyone you can ahead of the South Carolina primary of 2016. The facts are the facts. Watch these videos and let the truth fly free.
I’ll be unusually brief on this article to encourage regular people into reading and watching it. The following video was shot at the West Chester Tea Party forum at Butler Tech hosting the candidates running for John Boehner’s old seat. I know a few of the guys, but not much detail, except what we learned in the video. So prior to the March 15th primary vote—which will this year be extremely important—more so than most years—you should watch this video and determine who you want to vote for based on this candidate forum.
For those who are not particularly up-to-date on what the 8th District is, it’s the congressional district John Boehner formally represented. It’s a large district that encompasses the wealthy southeastern portion, and extends all the way up through the farms of middle Ohio into Darke County. The next congressman needs to be someone who can deal with a president that will be extremely unconventional—as mainstream politics is on the way out. So keep that in mind when voting. Hopefully, there is something in this video that leads you to the correct answer.
Remember to vote on March 15th, 2016 and pass this along to a friend so they can become educated on who the candidates are, and how they might represent the 8th District in Ohio.
Iowa, this is your time on the stage. Really, the next election for President of the United States begins and ends with you. If you were to take a moment from preparing for the spring planting period, from life on your farms and industry to vote in the Republican primary on February 1st, you could put this thing to bed right now. This particular site that you are reading gets particularly busy during election periods because most people don’t have time to pay attention to critical issues regarding politics. Prior to elections they usually do an internet search, and they run across my articles. They read them as opposed to other publications because I usually provide 1500 word articles that cover the details of an issue deep diving into the psychology and politics behind whatever is on the ballot. People have lost faith in the mainstream news, and their local newspapers, but they do tend to trust me and it shows up in voting results usually with a small swing in percentage to the passage or failure of an issue. In close elections—sometimes that’s all it takes. At this point, I’m not sure that Iowa will be close for Republicans but just in case, you should take the opportunity to go out and vote and you should cast your support behind Donald Trump. If you watch the following videos about Trump, you can see easily that he is already more presidential than anybody we’ve had the opportunity to vote for in several decades. And he is the best option for 2016 on either side. But, it takes feet on the ground to actually vote and you should after you’ve watched the following videos completely. Then, pass them along to a friend to make sure they vote for Trump as well.
Trump is a successful person and as just a candidate he has shown that he can hold massive rallies. It is easy to see what kind of president he would be—all encompassing and hard-working taking up the charge personally to jump-start our economy in America once again. The best way to do that is to make the American brand something of value again just as Trump has made his family name nearly household recognizable before he ever ran for president. If Trump can repair the American brand across the world, instantly, many of the things he is declaring that he’ll fix will resolve themselves. Part of the concept of building a wall between Mexico and America is to make entry into the United States more valuable. Any time there is market saturation of something its value goes down. Open border advocates do not like the American concept so they count on lowering the value of the United States so that Mexico can diffuse Constitutional limits through elections and changing demographics. Trump has the experience to ensure that limited access is the best way to command respect of a nice penthouse apartment in one of his buildings in New York. Nobody respects something they get cheaply, or even worse for free. Trump is the most poised of anybody to restore value to what being an American truly should have always been.
There are other good candidates running in the GOP primary. But they just don’t have that next level of ability that Trump has. Not only can Trump identify a problem, but he knows how to talk to people, even those who don’t like him. I think he alone would make the House and Senate work properly with his sheer charisma. I do not think I will always agree with him, but I think he will be very close to what all conservatives have always wanted because as a private sector guy, who owes nothing to any lobbyist, he can actually afford to resist the temptations to enrich himself with K-Street deals where every other candidate must acquiesce to some extent making them much less effective on a day-to-day basis.
The great power struggle in the beltway–what they really fear about Trump, is in losing power to a person elected by a majority of the voters for really the first time in over a century. K-Street truly rules the beltway of Washington. It’s not the House and Senate—it is the lobbyists who run our government and nobody has an opportunity to end that rule better than Donald Trump. For the sake of our country this process of lobbyists controlling our politics in a constitutional republic has to stop. If we don’t end it during this next election cycle, we will lose our country. There is only one way out of our impending fiscal crises—which $19 trillion on the United States debt clock is looming over all our futures—and that is tremendous GDP growth that can only come from a dynamic personality like Trump.
Just prior to the Iowa vote the conservative publication National Review committed an entire edition to hit pieces against Trump from people like Glenn Beck Dana, Loesch, Bill Kristol , and other so-called conservatives. Let me tell you something dear Iowa voter—nobody on that list is more conservative than I am. Not a single person writing for the Nation Review beats me on conservative values. I like a lot of those people the way I might like a typical liberal. I might talk to them about a football game, or a popular movie, but they don’t want to talk politics with me. They are not more conservative than I am. I am extremely pro Second Amendment, anti-abortion, anti-entitlement, pro-American exceptionalism, anti-drug, and I’m against men crying…………..Bill O’Reilly to me is a bleeding heart hippie liberal. My wife is a happy housewife who brings my dinner to my chair every night and we are happy in that traditional role. I’m so conservative that I don’t even show up on a graph measuring conservativism—because I’m to the right of even that. And I’m too smart to be considered a right-winged loon so that description doesn’t fit either. These people, many of whom came into the national stage through Glenn Beck and are simply backing his vision of a constitutional republic that falls in behind a George Washington presidency—and that’s just not realistic or relevant in 2016. Beck thinks he’s doing the work of God, but in reality he’s a former drug addict who is trying to rectify his past with a born again Christian optimism that does not have the ability to combat the problems on K-Street. You can’t throw Bibles at the crooks and loons in Washington—you have to beat them at their own game. The National Review is the proof of why conservatives have been losing for years—because they fail to identify the proper targets to attack and when they do they cannot come up with a strategy to deal with it. Like Beck, they look for guidance through prayer instead of with their own eyes paralyzing them to act properly against evil. While religious values are fine, the reality must be confronted that fewer people than ever can identify with religion and the 2016 election has to be about fiscal issues, not religious ones. One thing certainly comes before other things and their priorities are strategically off at the National Review.
Being a conservative I’m also quite accustomed to being around people who make things in business and I understand why they donate money to politicians. Because of the socialist polices embedded in the United States business people have to pay politicians off otherwise they won’t get their zoning approved, government regulators show up to shut down their businesses, and even worse the IRS shows up to destroy a company through the audit process—so job providers have to pay the troll or face serious ramifications. I see in Trump a person so sick of that process that he has an opportunity to destroy it from within. Aside from inflating his brand I think this is the other big reason that Trump is running for president—to take away the crony shackles that he had to navigate around in New York politics—and replace it with a more free market option. Trump had to support democrats in New York, particularly the various mayors he’s had to deal with over the years otherwise his real estate investments would die awaiting approvals that those politicians had the power to control. For the first time in his life, Trump is truly free—he has enough money that he doesn’t have to depend on anybody for his sustenance, which has allowed him to publicly discuss his politics. Most people during their money-making years—30s through their 50s–avoid public declarations of their political leanings because it gets in the way of dealing with other people. Older people can afford to make people angry with their opinions, so it is usually they who are the most vocal. Trump is now one of those older guys who has all the money he will ever need, so he can afford to let his tongue fly which is why a lot of his opinions are now clearer on things than they used to be. Why would Trump give money to Hillary Clinton—because she was a senator from New York and she could help him get things passed? If he needed a New York mayor to get out of his way, he could call up Hillary and apply some pressure. That’s the way it works. It should say a lot about Trump that he’s been willing to attack the Clintons to get this far in the race. It’s just business for Trump and he has shown that he’ll put American business in front of everything.
So it’s up to you Iowa. You have the facts, you’ve seen the videos. You know what you have to do. Go out there and vote for Trump. Put an end to this election from the very first vote. Be the first and last state to decide who will be President of the United States in 2016. If Iowa goes for Trump the rest of the states will follow and that will be it. All you have to do is show up and cast your ballot for a real opportunity—the one last hope of saving America from a fiscal crises and a detrimental political system that is imploding as we speak. Trump has accomplished more than any of the individuals writing for the National Review. Trump is a conservative because of the way he runs his businesses and manages his family. His actions tell the truth about who he is. The interpretation of his actions are often read by people who aren’t smart enough or conservative enough to see what he is up to behind the curtain. But it’s not hard for me to see. And hopefully, Iowa, you are smart enough to see it to. History is in your hands—so make the right decision.
The Socialist Agenda is the multi-platform communication project of the Socialist Central Committee, Ltd. The project opposes the ultra-conservative political insurgency. The project reintroduces socialism to America’s mainstream voters.
CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Argued on March 24, 2009 and Decided on January 21, 2010, the United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by a nonprofit corporation, more specifically – by a Political Action Committees.
SOCIALIST CENTRAL COMMITTEE, LTD. WAS ESTABLISHED.
Anticipating the outcome of the Court’s decision, a select group of socialists in Indianapolis established the SCC as a political action committee (PAC) to promote socialist political issues in January 2010. The original committee consisted of a member of the Socialist Party USA, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, and two independent socialists.
IGNORANCE ATTACKS THE UNKNOWN
Immediately upon the Central Committee’s initial public efforts in March 2010, poorly educated members of the Socialist Party USA, which included its National Secretary – Greg Pason, began to disparage the Central Committee’s promotional efforts of socialist issues by inflicting the SCC with a constant barrage of false rumors, innuendo and outright lies.
ADMINISTRATIVE DEACTIVATION
Because of the continued disparagement by Socialist Party USA members, the committee decided to allow the SCC to be administratively deactivated in 2014. This move permitted individual committee members to pursue electioneering efforts outside the legal confines of the Federal Elections Commission.
Apparently the GOP doesn’t get it. Why in the world they put Nikki Haley on as the response to Idiot Obama’s State of the Union speech from the standpoint of the Republicans is a mystery greater than the Bermuda Triangle. As I watched her I couldn’t help but think that it was Haley who had caved into progressives regarding the Confederate Flag issue at the South Carolina State House. Progressives applied pressure and she yielded giving them the victory. Listen Republicans—compromise is a dirty word–when something is wrong and something is right. The world is full of black and white—metaphorically—not literally, and compromising with wrong does not make it partially right. You’d think that the GOP would have looked at the current presidential frontrunners, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz and they’d put up someone to respond to the president that more accurately reflected the values of current GOP voters. Instead they put forward a RINO at best who said this:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans should resist “the siren call of the angriest voices” in how the nation treats immigrants, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said Tuesday as the GOP used its response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address to try softening the tough stance embraced by some of its leading presidential candidates.
The U.S.-born daughter of Indian immigrants, Haley said the country is facing its most dangerous security threat since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. That was a reference to the Islamic State group, which has taken credit for attacks in Paris and elsewhere and may have inspired last month’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, California.
“During anxious times, it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices,” Haley, mentioned by some as a potential vice presidential candidate this year, said in her party’s formal response to Obama. “We must resist that temptation.”
No, the temptation against judgment where smart behavior must prevail over stupid behavior must not be compromised. Having an open border in the United States is a foreign desire to destroy American capitalism with social diffusion, and anybody intelligent would understand that. Instead, the GOP thought it was more important, and stylish to put a woman RINO who failed a contentious issue in South Carolina up as an answer to the GOP party platform going into the 2016 election season. We are well beyond this kind of nonsense and trickery folks.
I’m sure Nikki Haley is a nice woman. She’s somebody’s daughter, wife and mother. She has a little bit of history with sleeping around with political bloggers and lobbyists which she denies, but I’m sure there’s some truth to it. Funny things happen when people are in powerful positions and they share common values after hard-fought battles. When you mix males and females together they tend to want to stick things into one another for pleasurable outcomes unless they can control their emotions—and politics is an emotional endeavor—extreme emotional highs and lows. I actually knew a very driven political woman like Nikki Haley once and from 35 to 40 years of age, she was a bit of a sex addict—it went right along with the politics she was addicted to. Her husband wasn’t a part of that world, so he didn’t understand why she was always so charged up all the time. So there is likely some truth to the allegations against her—she fits the profile. I personally don’t care. She can do what she wants but with all things considered—she is what the Republican Party thought most represented their party? Seriously? Couldn’t they find anybody better—less controversial with a track record of success? Is she the best that they have?
Apparently so, which says a lot. I don’t think she’s done a bad job in South Carolina but I wouldn’t call her an example of excellence either. I think with Republicans they picked her because she’s young, not horrible to look at, and she is “inclusive” to the open border policies foreign insurgents like George Soros are conducting against American sovereignty—which keeps campaign donations flowing into their political machine. Maintaining borders in America is important to sustaining the value of American citizenship. There is a reason that some of the highest per capita incomes in the world are within the United States. It’s part of our “brand.” If you let anybody into a movie how can its worth be measured but in ticket prices? If everyone were just allowed to watch a movie how would anybody know if that movie is any good? The price of a ticket and how many people buy one determine a movie’s value. Even communist leaning liberals should be able to understand that. The public has limited access to the celebrities in movies which drives up the desire for the market brand of those actors. All that restriction causes increased value. Limited access causes a desire to pay for a ticket price to see a movie with a particular actor involved so the viewer can at least be close to that person.
When a woman like Nikki Haley has rumors of one night stands with political lobbyists it lowers her brand. The better thing to do is to be highly desired as a sex object without providing the sex—that way many people might yearn to be with her, they may even do what she wants them to do hoping to get access—but if people think she’s easy—sexually, her brand goes down because other people have already had her. Whether or not it’s fair, it’s the rules of the game. If a woman gives up sex too easily she is viewed as a slut. If she is faithful to a husband or her family in general her brand goes up enormously because that person is inaccessible. But if anybody can have sex with her any time they want, the value of sex with her is reduced to something much less spectacular. The same holds true with an entire country, the more restrictive the access; the more people value it when they get access. The less, the more they will want to abuse the situation to satisfy their personal whims.
Because of the rumors and the evidence by text messages and other aspects I have witnessed in real life, I think Nikki Haley probably has some trouble with maintaining her sexual poise in politically active climates. That might impress members of the GOP who want to sleep with her sometime knowing that she’s easy game to tag, but it doesn’t do much to deliver the confidence that the GOP knows what they are doing. Then to compound the problem it was only this previous summer where progressives had beat her to a pulp over the Confederate Flag leaving her to compromise under the pressure. The racist insurgents didn’t give anything up to have the flag removed, it simply forced Nikki Haley to come off her position more to the center strategically—which was a loss for her. Granted, it was a tough position for her to be in, and the GOP probably should have let a few years pass before they used her as the Republican answer to the President’s State of the Union address. But they used her anyway because they thought it was a good idea.
But knowing politics the way I do I’d say somebody had other ideas given Haley’s reputation. And that is just sad. The GOP should be able to put up better, more reliable people other than Nikki Haley. They didn’t—because they were unable to think of anybody—which shows why they are so far out of touch. Some of those same idiots were seeking Obama’s autograph after the State of the Union speech even though it was a terrible speech speaking about a terrible presidency leaving the nation horribly in debt and a laughing-stock across the world. It’s no wonder the GOP is failing just slightly less than the Democrats—they just don’t understand. But in 2016, they’re going to learn just how much they don’t know and why they are going extinct. And their extinction will make me very happy. Right now, I’m just embarrassed for them. They are so unimaginative and driven by primal urges—it’s just pathetic.
First of all, the crying bastard President Obama does not represent my views—he is not “my” president. I say bastard of him for two reasons, he is obnoxiously disagreeable toward traditional American views, and he was born to unmarried parents as there is a lot of questions regarding his father. So he fulfills the appropriate definition of a bastard by most accepted definitions—so it’s not a derogatory term. Regarding the crying, I said the same thing about John Boehner. In spite of what modern feminists and other progressives say, it’s not alright for a man to cry over stupid things. Gun violence and mass shootings are nearly exclusively the result of mismanagement by the government. Government in most cases has created the violent communities that shootings occur in, like Chicago. Or they have let terrorists fester within our borders without acting before terror activities have occurred. Americans have given up a lot of freedoms supposedly for the sake of security and that has turned out to be a stupid thing to do. Government has failed to do its job and now they want more power to do an even worse job—and to get it, the president resorted to crying like a child and that is pathetic.
The video above is a warning from Canada where their gun laws are pacing themselves to the rest of the so-called developed world—the kind of world the crying Obama referred to. It is the direction America is heading so pay attention to it. In it a gun rights supporter was condemned by the government every way they legally could for defending his property from some assailants launching firebombs at him. The Canadian government did not want him to defend his property especially with a firearm, so they did worse to him personally than the fire bombers. It is a very sad case and is the direction that gun laws in America by cry baby politicians want to take our society. It’s the wrong direction and should be reversed immediately.
The attack on that individual gun owner has the very subtle inclination that property rights are not the value of any individual possession, so there should never be an instance where an individual should have to defend themselves or their possessions. To the progressive descendant of communism individuals should surrender themselves to criminal intent for the benefit of the greater good. If a criminal wants something you have, they should have the right to it under the umbrella of wealth redistribution and no individual should feel compelled to take a life for the protection of a possession. The same mentality resides within the realm of a spouse—this is why progressives seek to demean family value with gay rights and welfare programs—to weaken individual input. Therefore, guns should not be allowed to protect an individual from criminal intent because to their view as a mass society of collectivism, collateral damage is perfectly acceptable—if the greater good is placed as a value over individuals and their possessions.
But that is clearly not the type of society that we have in the United States. Our politicians do not currently represent the type of people who currently make up most of the American population between city areas. Most of those politicians manipulated their way by default into positions of power only to turn their eyes toward Europe for guidance and that’s not acceptable—especially when people like Obama standing in our White House cry to the world about how he wants to stop gun violence on a mass scale but fails to shed a tear when a white woman is gunned down by an illegal alien in San Francisco for no reason at all—but mass government mismanagement. The tears are only shed for the collective entity of our global population, not the rights of one woman, or her father when a cold-blooded killer took away from them the love they shared as a possession of emotion.
That is just how sick progressives are in their views of the world. They will support the mass extinction of babies through abortion, and support the terrorism in the Middle East but will take a hard stand against the rancher who wants to protect their grazing rights or an individual gunman who protects their wife or home from an assailant. Their broken philosophy is always an emphasis on mass collectivism as opposed to individual integrity. That is why so many progressives have mental illnesses—where their values are not reflected in their daily actions—because they associate behavior by the values of the collective as opposed to their own private behavior. So if everyone is acting poorly, whether they are drunken losers or a mob rioting in the streets they can justify the morality of bad behavior by the measurement of the group association. If everyone is doing wrong, then it’s OK to also do so—so long as a majority is in agreement.
That in essence is the largest problem that there is in regard to Obama’s executive orders against personal firearms issued on January 5th 2016—because it gives those same masses the ability to define sanity. On the surface the proposals sound reasonable, background checks strengthening, gun show restrictions, and attempting to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally deficient. The trouble is that the door is now open for the government to determine that every person on some sort of pain medication or depression illness is subject to the interpretation of being mentally unstable to purchase or own a firearm. Additionally, the slippery slope of judgment for sanity will be interpreted by government with the same rationalization that we see among the current masses—the depraved lunatics of urban riots, public schools, and open socialists—the Bernie Sanders type of supporters. Mental acuity will then be determined by the victor of whatever political party holds the White House at any particular time which would be bad for both sides. With that additional interpretation the same government that decided that it was alright for the IRS to use a tax status to badger Tea Party groups will determine what constitutes mental health.
For the family that believes that a housewife should watch over the children at home in a very traditional way, and has a personal history of protesting Smart Meters—a progressive run federal government would likely view that behavior as insane and would prohibit those citizens from owning firearms. A similar family that has a Twitter history showing strong conservative views would likely put those citizens on a watch list banning further purchases of guns. It would be as simple as that. The pattern around the world from Canada to Australia is already in place, we have the fortune in America to see what our current politicians are up to, because they are copying those fools from Europe and other places on removing firearms from their society to make way for some strategy that certainly works against individual liberty. If allowed to feaster, Obama’s path would certainly lead to a similar letter as those proposed in Canada—be prepared to surrender firearms of a certain make and model until they are all gone from society and confiscated by the government. They never do things in swift strokes, but over a long period of time gradually wearing down resistance to their diabolical utterances.
I’ve had a Federal Firearms License before, so I know what it’s like for them to demand to see your paperwork in the middle of dinner, or on a Friday afternoon while you’re sitting naked in your hot tub with your wife just enjoying the day in your own backyard. When given the right for some pin headed bureaucrat to harass an individual, they nearly always do. Because their value system is not based on individual integrity, but mass approval—so if their peers approve of their behavior of harassment, then they feel validated to do so—they use government coercion to exert force on individuals so to preserve the collective masses and their whims of necessity.
Guns were always meant to protect the individual against mass tyranny and to guarantee that private property would remain valuable in the course of American history. Confiscation is the path to losing all freedoms and giving the drooling mouths of bureaucrats all the power they need to exact tyranny upon individuals and their possessions. Hidden behind the government and their global backers is the long diabolical yearnings of communism which fuels their effort, the Karl Marx war against individuality and personal property. So it is behind that premise that governments are at war with firearms and what drives Obama to cry in front of the world because deep down inside his essential being, he has a lot more in common with Karl Marx than he does Thomas Jefferson. It is because of menaces like Barack Obama and all his progressive friends that Jefferson uttered……………“I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.” You can’t very well do that if they are armed, and you’re not. Hence, the reason for gun control around the world.
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s do-it-himself plan for keeping guns away from those who shouldn’t have them falls far short of what he’d hoped to accomplish through legislation after a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School shook the country in 2012.
Yet even the more modest steps Obama will announce Tuesday rely on murky interpretations of existing law that could be easily reversed by his successor.
Obama’s package of executive actions aims to curb what he’s described as a scourge of gun violence in the U.S., punctuated by appalling mass shootings in Newtown, Connecticut; Charleston, South Carolina; and Tucson, Arizona, among many others. After Newtown, Obama sought far-reaching, bipartisan legislation that went beyond background checks.
At that late hour with my gun fixed, talk radio broadcasting interesting debate, I felt wonderful not just for repair job successfully performed, but because the gun as a hobby was a reminder that in America I don’t have to worship at the feet of any aristocrat or noble character of any kind. If the President walked up to my home at that moment there wouldn’t be any bowing or pandering going on. I’d simply look at him like some little girl selling Girl Scout cookies—since he likes to cry so much. I’d listen to what he wanted then decide to help him or not. But I wouldn’t be compelled to do anything—and it is the gun that gives me that freedom and keeps us sanctimonious even as radical politicians create executive orders to make America into something they are more comfortable with—because they were essentially too lazy to embrace our culture and do the work themselves of adopting its values into their lives. That is why Obama’s executive orders are such an insult and why Brownells continues to be one of my favorite companies on planet earth. I just love those guys!
During the weekend news dump right after the New Year of 2016 ISIS lunatics finally released a video featuring Donald Trump as one of their reasons for recruiting against America. In the weeks prior, as the videos below clearly chronicle, Hillary had accused the presidential front-runner Trump of being the best recruiting tool for ISIS. Of course Trump blasted her for being a liar. Then within a week ISIS released a video finally featuring Trump in just the manner that Hillary Clinton suggested. Hmmmmmmmmm, the timing is very interesting.
I was having a piña colada at the Cheesecake Factory bar as the Arizona Razorbacks won the Liberty Bowl. It was a crowded place and many were watching the game with me. Many others were on their phones checking news, texts and other reading material. It was a vibrant, energetic atmosphere reflecting American values emphatically, and all I could think about was ISIS. Terrorists and radical hopefuls don’t have the same vibrant culture in east Syria and upper Iraq. They have a lot of sand, a little bit of the Internet, and they have the news from Al Jazeera. They certainly don’t have a Cheesecake Factory, and if they did, they would just blow it up—because that’s what they do. They are insecure religious nutcases that are largely a product of their limitations—their lack of culture and imagination. They hate the West the way a jealous neighbor hates a successful household down the street. They picked a collective based economy as their means for development, and they obviously made a mistake. So their war with the West is essentially to attempt to erase the mistakes of their own culture. That’s when I remembered a couple of things about Hillary Clinton from the past several months.
Do you remember dear reader when Hillary Clinton said “In fact viewership of Al Jazeera is going up in the United States because it’s real news. You may not agree with it, but you feel like you’re getting real news around the clock instead of a million commercials and, you know, arguments between talking heads and the kind of stuff that we do on our news which, you know, is not particularly informative to us, let alone foreigners.” That is very interesting, she was obviously at the time using a Saul Alinsky tactic from the book Rules for Radicals to plant a seed in the media she hoped would be more conducive to her many faults and eventual presidential campaign. She has for many years planted stories that she hoped would change the way that things get covered—such as her Bengahzi screw-up where she insisted that the terrorist attack was a reaction to a anti-Islamic movie, and not her sheer incompetence as she through the Obama administration had been involved in arming rebels against Libyan, Egyptian, and Syrian dictators. In the wake of that activity ISIS was born and the Arab Spring emerged. But Hillary hoped the media would blame the whole thing on a video that had no relevance. It is very interesting that Clinton and her friend Al Gore are very supportive of Al Jazeera as a network—as it is the news of the Islamic Caliphate presently.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/918240/hillary-clinton-our-news-should-be-more-like-al-jazeera-change-minds-and-attitudes-video/#zT2mHpPlXZfYSqeG.99
Al Jazeera (Arabic: الجزيرة al-ǧazīrah IPA: [æl dʒæˈziːrɐ], literally “The Peninsula”,[3] referring to the Arabian Peninsula), also known as Aljazeera and JSC (Jazeera Satellite Channel), is a Doha-based state-funded broadcaster owned by the Al Jazeera Media Network, which is partly funded by the House of Thani, the ruling family of Qatar.[4] Initially launched as an Arabic news and current affairs satellite TV channel, Al Jazeera has since expanded into a network with several outlets, including the Internet and specialtyTV channels in multiple languages.
Al Jazeera is among the largest news organizations with 80 bureaus around the world. Al Jazeera is owned by the government of Qatar.[4][5][6][7][8][9] While Al Jazeera officials have stated that they are editorially independent from the government of Qatar, this assertion has been disputed.[10]
The original Al Jazeera channel’s willingness to broadcast dissenting views, for example on call-in shows, created controversies in the Arab States of the Persian Gulf. The station gained worldwide attention following the outbreak of war in Afghanistan, when it was the only channel to cover the war live, from its office there.[11]
Al Jazeera has been called a propaganda outlet for the Qatari government and its foreign policy, by analysts and by news reporters, including former Al Jazeera reporters.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18] The network is sometimes perceived to have mainly Islamist perspectives, promoting the Muslim Brotherhood, and having a pro-Sunni and an anti-Shia bias in its reporting of regional issues.[19][20] However, Al Jazeera insists it covers all sides of a debate, it says it presents Israel’s view, Iran’s view and even aired videos released by Osama bin Laden.[21]
Isn’t that a strange thing to say by Hillary Clinton within the American media culture that is obviously overflowing with information and voluminous details of everything from sports scores to nitty-gritty politics? She thinks Americans could learn something from Al Jazeera. But that’s not the only strange bit of information that has come out about Hillary Clinton over the last six months—which was lost to the media world because of her scandals with email and her stalled run for POTUS. Yoko Ono, the widow of John Lennon, when asked about her thoughts about Hillary’s run for the presidency completely took reporters by surprise. “We met many times during the New York Vietnam War protests in the 1970s, and became very intimate. We shared many of the same values about sexual equality, fighting against the authoritarian, patriarchal, male-dominated society we were raised in” she explained. “We had a brief romantic fling when I lived with John in Manhattan and Hillary was studying at Yale, but eventually we lost touch. I am amazed how things are going well for her and wish her the best for her campaign” she told reporters during the press conference.
The Clintons have always sold themselves as a traditional couple to voters, although anybody who pays attention can clearly see that Hillary is likely just as much of a sexual deviant as her husband is. In a bizarre manner, Hillary seems to enjoy her husband’s exploits with women because it is obvious that she has had many sexual relationships with women herself over the years—and she enjoys the relationships her husband has with other women in a voyeuristic fashion. This is a minor detail that is necessary for voters to understand. It’s one thing if Hillary came out and said that she likes sexual relationships with women and that is why she supports LGBT rights and all the rainbow marching parades that feature homosexuals and transvestites around the country so often—but she doesn’t—she avoids the question constantly and pretends it’s not important. So to keep the media off her heels digging up everything she tries to hide with 24 hour per day coverage into every aspect of a presidential candidate’s life—she floats to the public that she thinks Al Jazeera is the example of a news organization that should be followed.
That is why it’s important to understand who Qatar is. The wait at the Cheesecake Factory was nearly 45 minutes for a table for two and it was obvious to me that there was so much information out there that most of the people around me couldn’t absorb it all. As some people were snaked outside waiting for up to an hour and a half for a table they had likely forgotten about Hillary Clinton’s relationship with Al Jazeera and the government that produces the news organization in Qatar. Most of the people around me could tell me the details of the Razorbacks defense and the reason why they won the game over Kansas, but they probably couldn’t point to Qatar on a map. The Clinton Foundation and the terror group Hamas share a key donor: The government of Qatar, a leading backer of terror groups that has emerged in recent years as Hamas’ chief financial lifeline. Qatar, which has been designated by the State Department as a “significant terrorist financing risk,” has pledged more than $400 million to Hamas since 2012 and has long harbored one of the terror group’s senior leaders, Khaled Mashaal. At the same time, Qatar has sought to curry favor with elite Westerners, donatingbetween $1 million and $5 million through 2013 to the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. Isn’t that interesting that Clinton supported Al Jazeera, because they are big donors to the Clinton Foundation—but then again George Stephanopoulos at ABC has as well. So has Donald Trump. A lot of people have been extorted by the Clintons into giving money on their government shakedown conspiracies. But Qatar is different from New York personalities who donate a lot of money to everyone they think is a good organization. The Clintons use those American donations to hide their foreign donations with a lot of noise to conceal their true intentions—global government through occasional terrorism, LGBT rights to camouflage their past and present sexual exploits all in a desire to obtain more power and to expand the work of Saul Alinsky to every corner of the world.
Coming to the end of 2015 Hillary saw that Trump was the Republican frontrunner and that she wouldn’t be able to beat him in day-to-day combat, so she called in some favors. The government of Qatar heard her request and they found a way to get ISIS terrorists to put Donald Trump into a recruitment video. But it didn’t happen until a week after Trump called her a liar. I know from the crowd at the Cheesecake Factory that they don’t have the retention required to put all these pieces together—but I do. That’s why I write these stories because honestly, I don’t forget anything. I enjoy dynamic environments like busy restaurants during a football bowl game, but I always pay attention to the small stuff and when I hear some news, I log it away in the back of my mind until I get another piece of the puzzle.
What Hillary was doing to Trump was directed at her friends in Qatar, who are clear allies with her intended administration. She knows Trump will exploit all these malicious relationships over the next several months so she had to attack and try to make it look like the evidence was always there. But it wasn’t. All it did show was how close Hillary Clinton is to actual terrorists. It is clear her political influence reaches into the sands of east Iraq to the kids chanting death to America. And that she has hidden that relationship from the American public in the same way that she’s hidden her lesbian adventures with pop culture stars which transgressed for many years. She is as Trump said a liar. And Hillary counts on the fervor of American culture to hide her true intentions behind college football games and restaurant lines that occupy entire evenings—hoping that nobody will notice. But in that regard, she’s shit out of luck.
To further illustrate the level of the fight we are facing in 2016 have a look at this 2011 video of the White House Correspondence dinner. The first video is of Barack Obama roasting Donald Trump and the second is of Seth Myers from Saturday Night Live doing the same. The issue of tension was that Trump had been the one to push for Obama to release his birth certificate—which forced the White House to finally do it after stonewalling for over three years. It was quite a mystery and gave rise to the “birther movement.” Trump after a lot of persistence pushed, and pushed, and pushed until a document was produced leading to the victory lap in front of the media at the special 2011 engagement roasting Trump who was forced to sit stone faced in the middle of the action and take it.
I don’t think there is another radio or television broadcast where such an in-depth analysis of the situation concerning our modern problems can be heard. I was trained by Joseph Campbell to read and understand mythology—the same place that George Lucas learned it from, so I am uniquely positioned to provide commentary that nobody on cable, network, or radio news can provide regarding Star Wars, terrorism and the cultural responsibility of the Disney company to resist putting metal detectors at their entrance and banning toy guns from their properties. What is wrong in Disney and of course throughout the world is not related to security, it is in cultural values, which is what Matt and I focused on. Matt is in fact such a good radio guy that he knows how to set up the topics to extract it from me—which is why these conversations are so interesting.
The problem starts with culture and understanding what makes it, is it a reactive thing built from didactic desires, or is it a product of intellectual necessity? I would propose the later while Disney is currently functioning from the former. They believe that because they lack a strong CEO type who understands the complexity of culture building the way Walt Disney or George Lucas innately did. As a company of second-handers they have had to mimic the behavior of their former leaders, like Lucas and Disney, they are clueless in understanding how the responsibility for building culture falls on their shoulders. Similarly, they are clueless to understand when there is trouble how to deal with a crises. Because they are second-handers, people who live through others for their sustenance, they assume that somebody understands a situation better than they do, leaving them prone to put too much trust into governments and other collective forces to guide their decisions. That is why they prefer committees and boards of directors to make decisions instead of strong individualized leadership.
Disney made a huge mistake with The Force Awakens, every toy and commercial mostly featured the bad guy from the latest Star Wars movie to sell those products. In a desire to recover their investment into the film franchise and to get their market projections, they rely on marketing the villains as a way to guarantee their financial expectations. The net result is that the social impact on the population in general will be negative—kids are more interested in playing the bad guy when interacting with their peers than the good guys, which is a major problem. Just a few decades ago kids used to fight over who was going to be the good guy when playing among each other. Now nobody wants to be the good guy, and that is the fault of culture. What makes up that culture is every progressive who has pushed for less heroic characters in movies giving good reviews to flawed heroes as opposed to the squeaky clean types who don’t drink, smoke, or have sex before marriage. Our culture through music, movies, and television have put bad behavior on a pedestal and criticized good behavior. So it shouldn’t be any surprise that young kids fight over being the bad guy when playing instead of being a good guy. When there is nothing marketed for a new Star Wars movie but the bad guys, and the good guys are killed, or appear to be losing all the time, the behavior that children will mimic in their daily lives will reflect those priorities.
When Disney makes a film, or a television story of any kind, they must be careful not to allow the good guys to appear subservient to the bad guys in any way. The progressive experimentation with the gray areas of life is not healthy. It might make some Santa Monica bar slut feel better about her decisions in life for being a sperm receptacle during her twenties and early thirties, but it will not help young girls in the future not make similar mistakes. Hollywood is full of these young women who work in the industry and party at the bars around Wilshire Blvd and they think they are the smartest people in the world because they manage to show their boobs to Quentin Tarantino at a party, who is essentially the same little boy growing up in Knoxville, Tennessee that he has always been. I like Tarantino, we share a taste for Sergio Leone movies and car chases, but he’s not very sophisticated as a filmmaker. Yet because his movies feature good guys who go bad, often, and bad guys who do good, there is mass appeal to the gutter sluts and social misfits of our culture. But Tarantino currently sets the standard on Wilshire and those slutty Santa Monica types who put on heels during the day and strip it off for anybody at night create market value based on their intellectual assumptions. Marketing executives assume that those Hollywood filmmakers and the agents who dangle from the industry know what they are doing, so they follow right along, and soon the entire industry is copying off each other because nobody has an original idea about anything because nobody dare go against the trends of the day which are often set in those Santa Monica, and New York City bars by skanks, whores, and insecure social climbers.
Meanwhile a kid at Wal-Mart wants a new Star Wars toy and they see Kylo Ryn on the cover who looks like he’s always beating the good guys—otherwise he wouldn’t be featured so prominently on the marketing material. After five or six years of playing the bad guy, when the kid hits adolescence and has to make decisions about, drugs, and individual integrity, they stand on the foundations created for them by the toys they played with and the lessons they learned in their youth. If the message is confusing, that bad guys sometimes aren’t so bad and that good guys are often just as bad as good guys, then that person will grow up to be a messed up adult. And before anybody says they disagree, just look around at the adults you know dear reader, the world is full of such people—and this is how they were made. The instruction for proper intellectual value and social relationships is directly built from the type of stories that we tell our kids. It’s OK to market those stories under a capitalist banner, but there is a responsibility in doing so.
Now, I know the next thing the curious reader here will say is, if I had the opportunity to make millions of dollars selling stories featuring bad guys over good guys I would as well. Well, I have a long history with this, a background that had personal instruction by Sol Stein, Linda Nagata, and even a little help from Skip Press in putting me directly in contact with Steven Spielberg’s agent for a project I was working on. I have looking back on it a lot of experience with Hollywood, so I know what I’m talking about and let me say this. When given the opportunity to have a lot of money by writing bad guys, or sticking with my good guys, I have never surrendered my position. It may not be what the market desires right now, but I refuse to participate in the perpetuation of evil by promoting bad guys over good—and by supporting the gray over black and white morality, it accomplishes just as bad of an end result. I have forgone personal wealth to do the right thing, so I expect others to do so as well—especially the Disney Company. I’ve known quite a lot of those skanks, and whores in Hollywood and believe me, they aren’t all women—and I turned them away several times—because it was the right thing to do. So for the same reasons, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for those who do sell-out for some quick money.
As talked about with Matt Clark, the cause of the problems in our culture will not be solved with metal detectors and gun restrictions—the source is in broken culture perpetuated irresponsibility by the weakest and worst that our society has produced. If we really want to be safe and to have a good and productive society then we must focus on separating the good guys from the bad and avoiding designations of gray and muddied fantasies of equality where the bad are placed at the same level as the virtuous. The root cause of most of our societal misery around the world is in this very simple concept. And the only way out of it is to be good. That is why during my next show on WAAM I will focus on just that type of concept and will offer society something they won’t get anywhere else. A path toward virtue in America once again—be sure to tune in, because I will promise this, you won’t get this kind of show anywhere in the world in any media format. It will be one of a kind. My path through life is very unique and I am offering those important lessons for those who are best positioned to utilize them. I wouldn’t ask anybody to do what I have not been willing to do myself, if I can make decisions based on ethics for the benefit of culture building, then so can Disney—and everyone in entertainment.
The Overmanwarrior 