Shop Thru Us! Save Money!

Editorial Board

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Republicans specialize in defense. They have little offensive skill; normally defending against charges of being racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-immigration, Islamophobic, starving children, pushing granny off a cliff, and wanting blacks back on plantations.

In politics, as in sports, there is an offense and defense. In some sports the same players assume both roles, as in basketball and hockey, where a team may shift roles back and forth quickly as the game proceeds. In other sports, such as football, there are separate teams for offense and defense, specialists in their specific roles.

Political games often have separate teams for offense and defense; sometimes the political leaders, often their surrogates. In the case of Democrats, the media takes a prominent team role playing both ends of the field. The media can ignore unfavorable stories. A recent example is the sudden lack of interest or coverage of the Fort Lauderdale Airport shooting after the shooter’s Muslim conversionwas identified. And the media can play offense, as they are with ongoing and relentless attempts to discredit the incoming Trump administration.

What’s new this political cycle is a sportsman who can play both ends of the field, and well. The pitcher who can hit home runs. The quarterback who can also play safety and intercept passes. The Michael Jordan who can not only score points, but also block shots and steal the ball.

Traditional Republicans specialize in defense, although poorly, and have little offensive skill. Normally Republicans are defending themselves against being racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-immigration, Islamophobic, starving children, pushing granny off the cliff, and wanting blacks back on plantations.

Republican offensive skills are on par with some of the more hapless NFL teams. First they needed control of the House to advance a conservative agenda, repeal Obamacare, seal the border, and so on. Done in 2010. Then they needed the Senate too. Done in 2014. Still the Republican offense was throwing incomplete passes and barely running past the line of scrimmage. Obama continued to score against the GOP.



They needed control of the White House, too, before going on offense. Done as of a couple of months ago. Yet Republican leaders still can’t figure out how to not fumble the ball. Speaker Paul Ryan is already chipping away at one of President-elect Trump’s signature issues, illegal immigration, by backpedaling on enforcing existing laws previously passed by his own Congress. Some offense. Fumbling the opening snap of the ball.

Enter the new star athlete, able to play offense and defense, able to hit and field the ball at the same time, both quite effectively. Without any assistance from the media. Donald Trump continues to befuddle the political-media establishment by throwing completions and intercepting passes from the other team. How does he do it?

His primary weapon is a combined baseball bat and glove, which can hit doubles and triples and grab line drives that are seemingly out of reach.


The @realDonaldTrump account is causing fits among the media chattering class. And their Democrat allies who have nothing in their playbook to stop Trump’s Twitter train.

Looking at Trump’s tweets over the past few days demonstrates his versatility on offense and defense.

Congressman John Lewis took a recent swipe at Trump saying, "I don't see this President-elect as a legitimate president." These types of comments are much like the classic question, “When did you stop beating your wife?” Unanswerable based on the original premise.

Rather than ignoring Lewis’s jab or trying to explain why he is legitimate, Trump hit back. He promptly tweeted, “Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart.” Stopping the fast break by blocking the shot. Great defense.

His recent press conference also showcased his defensive skills. Faced with a hostile press and squawking CNN reporter Jim Acosta, Trump looked to be overrun. Instead he intercepted the big media pass by calling out CNN for “fake news” and immediately changing the narrative. Then spiking the ball by tweeting, “@CNN is in a total meltdown with their FAKE NEWS because their ratings are tanking since election and their credibility will soon be gone!” To his 20 million Twitter followers, retweeted 34 thousand times to many more Twitter users.

Also, last week was the L.L. Bean controversy.  A board member and company heiress contributed to a pro-Trump PAC. The #NeverTrumps immediately called for a boycott of L.L. Bean. Rather than distancing himself from L.L. Bean or returning the money as other Republicans might have done, Trump pushed back, tweeting, “Thank you to Linda Bean of L.L.Bean for your great support and courage. People will support you even more now. Buy L.L.Bean.”

This is not part of the Republican playbook, the weak defensive line actually able to stop any run up the middle. But while playing defense, Trump can still move the ball up the field.

Not focusing only on defending himself, Trump is also advancing his agenda. Obamacare repeal, one of his primary campaign issues, has not been forgotten. He tweeted at the same time as the above tweets, “The "Unaffordable" Care Act will soon be history!”

He also supported his cabinet nominees currently under Congressional scrutiny, “All of my Cabinet nominees are looking good and doing a great job. I want them to be themselves and express their own thoughts, not mine!”

Singles and doubles, gradually running up the score. While at the same time catching fly balls, and throwing out runners at first base.

Imagine if Mitt Romney could play offense and defense, rather than letting ground balls trickle through his legs then striking out. Romney had good ideas that he could not articulate or sell to the electorate. He was unable to shut down nonsensical memes such as not paying his taxes, mistreating the pet dog, bullying kids in high school, or causing his employees to die of cancer.

Romney allowed himself to be painted as an out-of-touch rich guy, entitled and uncaring. Not at all true, but pushed by the media and the Obama campaign, with no effective pushback from Romney. And the result was a second term for Obama.

What would Donald have done? Far worse was thrown at Trump, from both Republicans and Democrats, from the Clinton campaign and big media. Continuing to this day, less than a week before his inauguration. Yet Trump continues to intercept passes and move the ball down the field.

What a refreshing change for Republicans to have a party leader who can play offense and defense, effectively. An athlete the opposing team has never run up against, at least since the 1980s. And they have nothing in their playbook to stop him.

A new team. A new star athlete. What a great four, and hopefully eight, years ahead!


BY: Brian C. Joondeph

Brian C Joondeph, MD, MPS, a Denver based physician and writer. Follow him on Facebook  and Twitter.


Monday, 16 January 2017 05:06

Requiem for a Lightweight: Obama OUT

Critics often make for strange bedfellows.  Louis Farrakhan and Cornell West are examples.  Both argue that Barack Obama was not ready for prime time.  For Farrakhan, Obama failed on race and social issues.  For West, the 44th president was a sell-out to a capitalist establishment.  Overall, both say the Obamas didn't do much for blacks in particular and social justice in general.  For brothers like Farrakhan and West, the last eight years were a wasted opportunity.  

Buyer's remorse may be the new "hope and change."

There will be a black president one day – maybe not for decades, thanks to the outgoing regime.  Obama had little time for pragmatism and too much to do with special pleading; identity politics; and feckless, if not sanguinary, foreign policy.

Be it race or religion, Obama's tragic flaw was policy marked by timidity and moral ambiguity – both underwritten by the belief that he could be a racial, religious, or policy shape-shifter as the occasion demanded.  Having parents on both sides of racial and religious divides allowed Obama to play race and religious cards often, yet seldom well.

As team Obama heads for the exits, the race joker is again in play.  White working-class Americans and any flavor of Russians are the new bogymen for bad losers, right and left, across the land.




In the twilight of a checkered political career, Obama's only claim to legacy might be "first black," a dubious attribute that can never be more than a half-truth.  Half- truths might be a fitting coda to an era that may go down in history as a tipping point, a juncture where "fake news" became the real news.  Factual ambiguity is now viral and that cultural meme is a precedent that Obama owns.

Image via Fox News.

As a young hipster in exclusive white schools, he was "Barry," not Barack Hussein.  As a Chicago politician, Obama self-identified as a black man, although that identity was more expedient than real.  As a presidential candidate, Obama often ignored his African and Muslim antecedents while celebrating his heroic American white grandparents.

In mid-career, with a media assist, he jettisoned the "Hussein" moniker.  Clearly, it wasn't politically expedient to self-identify as black and Muslim, even in Farrakhan's Chicago.

Barack's father was an unfortunate stereotype, a deadbeat dad who abandoned his son and fled to a life of substance abuse in Africa.  Obama's mother seemed to be a white flower child with a taste for exotic, if not constant, mates.  Ultimately, Obama spent his formative years in the custody of white privilege and grandparents in Hawaii.  To this day, the black and Muslim sides of family Obama languish in Kenyan and Indonesian poverty and obscurity.

In the main, the president's personal career path was consistent snowflake: prep school, Ivy League college, prestigious law school, and then politics.  At the curb level, Barack Obama probably cared as much about black culture in America as does Chris Matthews.

After 20 January, the Obamas plan to remain in Washington so that their daughter can remain in a pricey, majority-white private secondary school.  Self-segregating public schools in Washington, D.C. are a function of entrenched double standards among elite black liberals like the Obamas.  Arguably, the District of Columbia has the worst public schools in America.  

Withal, you could argue that the "great black hope" was neither.  In life and theater, the last act is often like the first – bookends, if you will.

The Obama Bookends

Obama leaves the Oval Office as did the Clintons, trashing the White House.  Since the election, both families have done their level best to poison domestic and foreign policy wells.  First, there is challenging the legitimacy of the 2016 election at home and then blaming the Trump victory on white fright or Russian meddling abroad.

Sour grapes do not capture the stench of such 11th-hour hypocrisy.  And "sore loser" does not begin to describe the perfidy of American intelligencecollaboration in the partisan challenges to the legitimacy of the 2016 election.

Eight years of Obama torpor had nothing to do with the Clinton defeat?

If the Kremlin hacked the DNC attempt to hijack the Democrat primaries, such enterprise is a tribute to an efficient FSB or GRU.  Worse still, if there was a hack, and subsequent desinformatsiya campaign in America, any Kremlin scam is a testament to the manifest incompetence of the DNC and General Clapper'sbloated American intelligence megaplex.

The truth about the intelligence profession today is alarming.  The grand illusion in Congress about 16 U.S. intelligence agencies is the belief that spending is somehow related to performance.  Since 9/11, the business of the I.C. is clearly business, not efficiency, effectiveness, or improved national security.

The intelligence community took sides in the recent election because it anticipated a Clinton win.  Trump is a clear threat to business as usual at DOD and a clear threat to an obese and out-of-control intelligence behemoth.   

When the media speaks of weaponized cyber-attacks, the American sponsored "Stuxnet" assault on Iran's nuclear infrastructure is seldom mentioned.  U.S. intelligence fired the first salvo of the 21st-century internet wars as early as January 2010.  Any hack of the DNC is small potatoes compared to the Obama-Clapper idiocy of playing nuclear chicken in a dicey neighborhood like the Levant.

Bottom line: A Shia bomb is still waiting in the wings.

Beginning with the Sunni attack on Manhattan, intelligence community fundinghas been inversely proportionate to national security performance.  Indeed, regime change chickens have now come home to roost inside the Beltway.

Opposition to Trump in D.C. is now flirting with sedition.

The latest "Russian" hysteria has all the earmarks of xenophobia, vindictive remorse, or political vendetta.  General Clapper's empire bet on Obama and the Clintons.  Trump won in spite of Washington fixers.  Real change is a bitter pill for losers and elites alike.

The best revenge is often blowback.  Barack Obama and Jim Clapper have managed to turn Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, and Edward Snowden into global cyber-heroes.

Clapper and his agency vassals might now displace both Benedict Arnold and Rube Goldberg on the partisan political walk of shame.  If Russian intelligence is more effective than American intelligence, Putin might indeed take a bow, but surely Donald Trump is not the culprit, nor the beneficiary.

Obama leaves the Oval Office as he entered, festooned with garlands from sycophants.  The president got the Nobel "Peace" Prize at the start of his run when he had done nothing.  Now he gets the "Defense" Distinguished Service Medal after accomplishing little.  Both awards are bookends for wishful thinking.  Eight years of Obama were neither distinguished nor a service.

Obama probably killed, with Islamic allies, more Muslims than Charles Martel.  Mister Obama also leaves his successor at least five hot wars in the ummah and one cold war in Europe.  No fair analyst can possibly argue that America and the world are better, or safer, places after the Obama years.

Nearly a decade ago, Obama ran on a theme of "hope and change" as if he had a program for either.  Recent events in Chicago are a microcosm of domestic failure on both counts.  We could start with the Black Lives Matter hustle, a coalition of greedy lawyers, hip-hop, rap, and anti-cop punk activists.

Apologists might argue that Chicago is not Obama's problem, but if urban punk pathology is a national problem, then that buck stops on Obama's desk.

Chicago is Obama country – his nascent political constituency, if you will.  The Windy City is a burg where lives do not matter, especially black lives.  Chicago is the murder capital of America, a city where victims are usually black, and perps are almost always black, too.

In any given year, nearly five thousand of Mr. Obama's Illinois constituents will be maimed by criminals and a fifth of those usually end up dead.  Black mayhem is routine in every American city, most of which are one-party towns like Chicago and Washington, D.C., hostages to a smug and complacent Democratic Party.

Chronic, now generational, violence in the United States is a phenomenon of the urban American Left. Obama and his Party own that demographic.

The Chicago four.

The most recent racial atrocity in Chicago featured four punks who kidnapped a mentally challenged white man for two days of racial abuse and ritual torture.  The ordeal was live-streamed on YouTube.  The only difference between this incident and everyday city mayhem is that this victim was white.

Social pathology in places like Chicago is of a piece with Islamic necrosis abroad, a product of indulgence.  Tolerating aberrant behavior anywhere makes more of it possible everywhere.

Culture is behavior.  Behavior is culture.

Maybe it is too early to suggest that Barack Hussein Obama is America's first affirmative action president.  Buyer's remorse is the ugly side of affirmative action.  If facts and performance matter, Obama had eight years of golden opportunity to address domestic and foreign policy civility.  Alas, he did little or nothing on both accounts.  Both landscapes now are literally littered with body bags and the human detritus of civic incontinence.

Barack Obama was never varsity material.

Indeed, he doubled down on failure.  Obama never used his bully pulpit todemand a better moral standard for his core urban constituency at home or those perfidious Muslim "partners" he sought to appease abroad.

Obama's tenure is not without merit.  He looks good in a suit.  Just ask CNN or MSNBC.  He seems to have a nice family, too.  And Barack's rap is nonpareil.

Indeed, Obama sounds like a park bench preacher.  He's arrogant enough to tell a crowd to go to hell, and most marks would get in line for the trip.  The Obama aura for folks who work for a living; however, people in flyover country is something very different.  If you ask about Obama in Deer Lick, the response would be "all hat, no cowboy."

The black vote in America may continue to be a "blue wall," a racial monolith – or maybe now with Keith Ellison, just another round of domestic jihad.  Yet for the rest of America, any future appeals to melanin as an asset, religion as an excuse, or affirmative action as a remedy may be dead letters.

Team Obama out!  Let the requiems begin.

G. Murphy Donovan writes about the politics of national security. 


Neo-Cons, Neo-Libs, Democrats, Social Justice Warriors and Illegal Aliens: Your way of doing things, your beliefs and your values are OVER this Friday at 12 Noon!

This Friday is the political Apocalypse for a whole slew of people.  Neo-Conservatives, who have wrecked countless countries with seemingly endless wars - you're done.  Neo-Liberals and their Social Justice Warrior proxies, who find never-ending ways to complain and be offended, and to give free money to the free-shit crowd, it's over for you too.  You folks have all had a good run and on Friday at 12:00 Noon, eastern time, your way of doing things, your beliefs, your values and your power is over.

Of course, you don't see things this way. Your smug self-assurance that you're all so much nobler than the rest of us, drives you to obsession to have your way.  

But we've spent the better part of the last eight years suffering from your way and now the evidence in in for all to see: When it comes to matters social, cultural, and political, you folks are RETARDS.  



Your ideas are emotion-driven and are utter failures.  You want to supply otherwise able-bodied people the basic means to live rather than see them support themselves.  You want everyone to think your motives are altruistic. They're not.  

The reason you push so hard for "social justice" is because it gives YOU power.  And power is something that you love more than life itself.  Getting power, keeping it and using it are your reasons for existing.  But you hide this ugly truth behind a completely false narrative of "caring."  

Let's call a spade a spade: You don't give a shit about "the poor" all you care about are the VOTES of the poor.  You don't care one wit about inner-city Blacks.  All you care about are inner-city Black VOTES.    

Then, there are the Neo-Cons. . .  you bastards are flat-out evil.  

You wreck entire nations simply because you can, but usually to make certain your friends in Israel are better-off for your work.  Neo-Cons appear to have more loyalty to Israel than to the United States -- they're willing to fight for Israel right down to the very last AMERICAN.  You folks are DONE.



January 20th cannot come soon enough.  Instead of stepping back and trying to ensure a smooth transition for Donald Trump, Barack Obama has decided to go hog wild and use every ounce of presidential power still available to him.  He has been establishing a bunch of new national monuments, he just stabbed Israel in the back at the United Nations, and on Thursday he even took time to give Joe Biden a Presidential Medal of Freedom.  But one of the things that has people the most concerned is his endless provoking of Russia.  Every few days it seems like Obama is doing something else to aggravate Russia, and if he wasn’t leaving office in about a week I am sure that the mainstream media would be full of speculation about a possible war.

Lame duck presidents are not supposed to make risky moves like this once a new president has been elected.  On Thursday, we learned that U.S. troops have been permanently deployed to Poland for the very first time

American soldiers rolled into Poland on Thursday, fulfilling a dream some Poles have had since the fall of communism in 1989 to have U.S. troops on their soil as a deterrent against Russia.

Some people waved and held up American flags as U.S. troops in tanks and other vehicles crossed into southwestern Poland from Germany and headed toward the town of Zagan, where they will be based. Poland’s prime minister and defense minister will welcome them in an official ceremony Saturday.

Poland was once a key member of the Warsaw Pact alliance, and the Russians are quite alarmed that U.S. troops will now be stationed so close to the Russian heartland.  The following comes from ABC News

“These actions threaten our interests, our security,” President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Thursday. “Especially as it concerns a third party building up its military presence near our borders. It’s not even a European state.”

And it has also been announced that NATO troops will arrive in Lithuania in late January.  If you will remember, Lithuania was actually part of the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

All of a sudden, Russia has become enemy number one.  Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton say that Russia is to blame for Clinton’s election loss, and so at the end of December Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats from the country.

That is the sort of thing that you do before a war starts.

Over in Europe, they are so freaked out about potential Russian interference in their elections that they are “erecting defenses to counter possible Russian cyber attacks”

Nations in Europe, where Germany and France this year hold elections, are erecting defenses to counter possible Russian cyber attacks and disinformation to sway Western politics, but intelligence experts say this might be too little and too late.

The issue of Russian “influence operations” has taken on new urgency after U.S. intelligence agencies released a non-classified assessment that President Vladimir Putin ordered a campaign to move the U.S. election in favor of Donald Trump.

European nations and NATO are setting up centers to identify “fake news”, bolstering cyber defenses and tracking use of social media which target Russian-speaking communities, far-right groups, political parties, voters and decision-makers.

Back in 2012, Barack Obama mocked Mitt Romney for saying that Russia was a serious threat to our national security.  He even joked that the 1980s were calling Romney because they wanted their foreign policy back.



At that time, Barack Obama boldly declared that the Cold War had been over for 20 years.  But now here we are just four years later and Barack Obama has gotten us into a new Cold War.  The crisis in Ukraine, the civil war in Syria, the price of oil, cyber-espionage and a whole host of other issues have brought tensions between the United States and Russia to a boiling point.

Many are hoping that relations with Russia will improve during the Trump administration, but the truth is that things could go either way.

It is important to remember that Trump will be surrounded by military people that are virulently anti-Russia.  For example, retired Marine General James Mattis has been nominated to be Defense Secretary, and this week he told Congress that Russia is the “principal threat” to U.S. security…

While much of the hearing has so far been without controveries, in the most striking moment so far, Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Russia stands as the “principal threat” to the United States’s security. He said this is because of its actions and efforts to “intimidate” other countries.

Senator John McCain questioned Mattis to get his opinion on how much of a threat Russia represents. Mattis response was that the world order is “under biggest attacks since WW2, from Russia, terrorist groups, and China’s actions in the South China Sea”, agreeing with the neocon senator that Russia is trying to break up NATO.

“I’m all for engagement” with Russia, “but we also have to recognize the reality of what Russia is up to,” Mattis told Senator Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island).

There is a great deal of concern that Trump’s view of Russia could be significantly shaped by strong military men such as Mattis.  Both Democrats and Republicans want Trump to become much more anti-Russia, and let us hope that he does not give in to the pressure.

Over in Russia, they view us very negatively as well.  A Gallup survey taken in mid-2016 found that current U.S. leadership (the Obama administration) only had a one percent approval rating in Russia.

Yes, you read that correctly.

You can’t get much lower than one percent.

The Russians consider themselves to be the great force for good in the world, and they consider the United States to be the great force for evil.  They openly talk about the possibility of nuclear war on their news broadcasts, and on one recent broadcast people were actually encouraged to locate the closest nuclear bomb shelter to their homes.

And in response to U.S. troops being deployed to Poland, the Russian government has deployed advanced anti-aircraft missile systems around Moscow

Russia has deployed anti-aircraft missile systems around Moscow to protect the capital from attack in the latest sign Vladimir Putin is preparing for war.

The s-400 Triumph air defence system has been providing air cover for Russian forces in Syria since November, and is now being deployed on home soil.

It is capable of hitting moving airborne targets including planes and incoming missiles and has a range of 400km.

We should be very thankful that Barack Obama is leaving office, because right now we are on a path that leads to war with Russia.

Every American should be hoping that Donald Trump will work to greatly improve relations with the Russians, but all it would take is one wrong move for things to start deteriorating once again.

A new Cold War has begun, and the stakes are incredibly high…

BY: Michael Snyder



The closing arguments for the Obama years are arriving, and they aren’t helping the outgoing president. A case in point is a new book published this week, one that acknowledges “Obama’s supporters have experienced [his presidency] as a continuous disappointment.”

Those supporters, and others, must have noticed that “for most of Obama’s term, wage gains were largely confined to the rich.” Or that “The administration’s planning in Libya clearly failed” or “It is certain that the actual outcome [of Obama’s Syria policy] was disastrous.”

Even many of President Obama’s proudest achievements look about as enduring as April snow: “If there was a single aspect of Obama’s legacy most vulnerable to reversal, it was his achievements on climate change,” the book says, and “Obama’s regulatory offensive is, of course, vulnerable to reversal by Donald Trump or the Supreme Court, since it rested upon executive action.” The longest chapter is titled “The Inevitability of Disappointment.”

Yet the title of the book containing these quotations is “Audacity: How Barack Obama Defied His Critics and Created a Legacy That Will Prevail,” by the New York magazine columnist and lefty firebrand Jonathan Chait.

Sustained coherence seems to elude the author. On page 99 we hear about those “overblown or even false claims that the new law [ObamaCare] was raising premiums,” but three pages later we learn, “Big insurers like Aetna pulled out of the exchanges, reducing options, and insurers in most markets raised their premiums.” Oh. Republican opposition, which boils down to wariness of new spending while Obama is racking up more debt than the previous 43 presidents combined doesn’t earn a rational counter-argument.

No, the GOP simply means “rage.” “Republican terror,”

Chait writes, is “berserk” with a “fierce and even crazed tone” (this last describes Paul Ryan).



On page 31, Chait declares “the simplistic initial hope of Obama’s giddy supporters that the symbolism of a black president could help heal, if not eliminate, racial prejudice turned out to have a real basis in fact.” But 20 pages back he comes to the opposite conclusion: “racism continues to lurk deep in the American psyche,” “Americans had split once again into mutually uncomprehending racial camps,” “the continued existence of racism in American life has been confirmed by a library of social-science research.”

Only an Obama fanboy would argue, just as a fire is going out, that the whole forest is about to burn down.

Meanwhile, current polling on the matter is clear. American worries about race relations, which had been stable for nearly 20 years, increased markedly in Obama’s second term, reaching a new high last spring, while the president’s approval rating on race issues, which was very high when his first term began, has ranged from 48 percent to a low of 26 percent for the last seven years or so, according to Gallup.

Chait grouses that the 2009 stimulus was dismally small and admits that the Republican critique of it as funding “a wish list of long-standing Democratic policies” had “an element of truth.”

Yet he also celebrates it as saving us from depression. Really? The downturn actually ended in June 2009 as the first stimulus checks were being signed. Only an Obama fanboy would argue, just as a fire is going out, that the whole forest is about to burn down.

Moreover, deep recessions (such as the 1981-82 one) that cause people to cut way back are generally followed by booming rebounds. This one wasn’t. Far from turbo-charging the economy, the stimulus was such a dud that five years after the recovery began, 72 percent of Americans said in a poll that they thought we were still in a recession. “The stimulus ultimately failed to do what America expected it to do — bring about a strong, sustainable recovery,” wrote Michael Grabell of ProPublica.

That’s hard to dispute given the sluggishness of the recovery — economic growth has been by far the weakest of any post-recession period since WWII. But Chait has zilch to say about that. Nor does Chait mention that Obama is the first president since Herbert Hoover to fail to preside over a single year of 3 percent growth. But hey, Obama fans, stay in your bubble. It’s cozy there.

Sealing himself off certainly didn’t work for the Bubble President, though. President Obama entered office thinking: “They love me! So they’ll love everything I do!” No. He had no backup plan for what to do if Congress became less than generous with the rubber stamp. Virtually every president has to negotiate with Capitol Hill — Reagan faced hostile Democrats in the House for his entire presidency — but Obama thought horse-trading was beneath him.

So he contented himself giving speeches and signing executive orders that Donald Trump is about to feed into the shredder. It looks like Obama’s chapter in the history books is going to be much like his résumé when he was elected president: thin.


BY: Kyle Smith, New York Post Newspaper



Saturday, 14 January 2017 10:11

Do Not Trust Governments or Their Employees


The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California has upheld the criminal conviction of Robert Kahre, the man who tried to circumvent the IRS by paying his employees in gold coin. He relied on the face value of the gold coins being below the legal threshold that triggers withholding taxes. A $20 gold coin is legal tender for only $20 — not its gold value. Gold was never demonetized. From a strict construction perspective, Kahre was correct and should not have been charged legally. However, the IRS interprets the value of the gold, not the legal tender value. The Court held that Kahre didn’t do his duty to serve as a tax collector for the United States, for which you, as an employer, are not paid. Kahre is currently serving a 15-year sentence.

You must understand that you are dancing with the devil. There is absolutely NO RULE OF LAW whatsoever and all your constitutional rights are fictional. Your liberty and human rights are in the hands of every petty government officer because they get to do whatever they desire and it has become your burden to go to court to PROVE you have any human rights. This is what happens in all republics. Whenever you have a political class, they always exert their power against the people. There is ABSOLUTELY NO HISTORICAL EXCEPTION!

I understand that people say I am wrong about bitcoin or cryptocurrencies. You cannot possibly fight against the government. They can say whatever they want and their judges rule in government’s favor. Forget it! You cannot find any possible legal argument that will ever survive.

Myths, Misunderstandings and Outright lies about owning Gold. Are you at risk?

Politicians often promote the least ethical people to various positions to ensure that they will have no loyalty, except to the person of their benefactor. Saint Thomas Becket (1119/1120 – 1170) was Archbishop of Canterbury from 1162 until his murder in 1170 at the altar of the church. He was the drinking buddy of King Henry II, King of England. Henry wanted to control the church and installed his friend who had never been a priest. Upon becoming Archbishop, Thomas found religion. He suddenly defended the church and was murdered in Canterbury Cathedral. So there are a few historical exceptions. However, the typical appointment of someone by politicians is normally to further their own power.



Edward Gibbon commented in “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” how the rule of law collapses In this case, he was commenting on Commodus:

“[Each] distinction of every kind soon became criminal. The possession of wealth stimulated the diligence of the informers; rigid virtue implied a tacit censure of the irregularities of Commodus; important services implied a dangerous superiority of merit; and the friendship of the father always insured the aversion of the son. Suspicion was equivalent to proof; trial to condemnation. The execution of a considerable senator was attended with the death of all who might lament or revenge his fate; and when Commodus had once tasted human blood, he became incapable of pity or remorse.

(Book 1, Chapter 4)

There is no sure-fire way to beat the government. They can say whatever they desire and the likelihood of you prevailing in a court of law is somewhere below zero. There are no fair trials. They do not exist anymore. All that is left is the Crash & Burn. Then we will get the chance to restart. It was Ben Franklin who warned against this legal system. He proposed that the legal community should nominate all judges. They will always nominate the best so they get rid of the competition. That was the Scottish system. The Constitutional Convention overruled Franklin to ensure the government would control the courts. This is what we get – total corruption and no rule of law.

Reprinted from Armstrong Economics.

Saturday, 14 January 2017 10:06

Seeds of Secession


Buddhism teaches that nothing ever happens at random. Nothing just occurs out of the blue, all by itself. A series of causes and conditions leads up to it. Everything is governed by this. Rain doesn’t just fall. A series of causes and conditions leads up to it, many of which have nothing to do with water by appearance to the human eye. Everything is caused by other things happening. Nothing happens at random.

Now, the Democrats currently think that this presidential election is some random event that just happened without causes and conditions leading up to it. They also think some external factor—Russia—created something from nothing. That being, the random event of losing the election. Even if Russia was a factor, what causes and conditions led up to Russia getting involved? Would it not be the fact the Democrats have continually provoked them? But the Democrats have not proven this because the truth is much more obvious. In fact, the Democrats themselves were the primary cause that they lost the election and they put into motion the causes and conditions that led up to it.

What we need to understand is that we live in a country divided into two distinctly different cultures, if you will. I call these Middle America and Coastal America. We saw this manifest as the electoral colleges handing the win to Trump. But to understand this dynamic, we need to first define these two cultures. Coastal America is predominantly the West and East Coast and the massive populations they have, which represent the slight majority population of the United States. These are, though not all of them, liberals to one degree or another. Middle America represents land mass, that being, they occupy most of the states between the two coasts. They represent often conservative populations. The electoral win represents the win of Middle America over Coastal America in this election.

In a cohesive nation, people define themselves as citizens of it. They would say, before anything else, “I am an American” and that would bind us together as a people regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation. However, Coastal America does not do this. Coastal America is a place of dividedness, as much as they proclaim “diversity” and “inclusiveness”. No. They define themselves by what makes them separate from everyone else. That being, skin color, gender, or sexual orientation. What’s more, they then attempt to lay claim to more rights than everyone else, special accommodations, and more political voice than everyone else. To the point that they believe their political voice can silence opposition by smearing opposition as “hate” and so forth. What’s more, they also say everyone else cannot “understand” them, therefore, outbursts of anger are supposed to be tolerated by everyone else. Thus, in truth, it is the Democrats who created the atmosphere of dividedness in this country because it is their special interest groups who set themselves above everyone else and separated themselves.

What happened was Middle America began to understand their voice no longer mattered in the face of everyone else that said because they were a thus-and-so ethnic group or self-identified gender subset. For example, if people in Middle America did not want men dressed as women using the same bathrooms as their ten-year-old daughters, they were slandered as “bigots” rather than their concerns as parents being heard. Therefore, Middle America finally had enough and decided they might as well divide themselves also. For their own interests, for once. The die was already cast, after all. It was the Democrats and liberals who first said, “We are not like you! We are different! We need a more political voice! We need to be heard!” Middle America simply said, “And so do we, for a change!”

Now, these causes and conditions led up to Donald Trump elected as president by Middle America over the slight population majority of Coastal America. They decided they needed someone who cared about things they cared about and did not concern himself with hypersensitive squishiness around most-favored special interest groups. These reasons are predominantly economic in nature. They wanted a guy who was more concerned with what appeared in working peoples’ pay envelopes and not what letter of the alphabet ought to come next after LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ, blah, blah, blah and the new gender of the month club. if Coastal America wants to continue with those games, that’s fine. But they need to understand it is they who have rendered the word “American” obsolete and, ergo, they cannot complain when others then agree that, yes, we are divided.

Now we must come to the facts. The first fact is: We no longer have anything in common. Middle America and Coastal America cannot be reconciled at this point. Too much has happened for that to be repaired. We need to understand another dynamic. Coastal America controls population centers, some industry, the political machine, the entertainment industry, and major ports. But Middle America controls the food, oil, minerals, and the vast majority of lands where nuclear weapons are sequestered. You, Coastal America, cannot simply dictate your will to the people that feed you. Period. What works for you out there in Los Angeles does not work for people in Utah, sorry. If you keep pretending like everyone in America thinks like you do, then you are fools. You divided yourself from the concept of being “American” because you said you were first and foremost this ethnic group or gender subset. You forgot something: We are first human beings. And human history teaches that without cohesiveness, any nation or society will decay and fall apart.

Therefore, the causes and conditions leading up to eventual secession are already present. The election of Donald Trump is a huge signal that this will eventually occur as more causes and conditions manifest. Soon, Middle America will discover they will be better off to be their own socio-economic group without having to carry the dead weight of Coastal America bureaucracy and political correctness/foolishness behind it. Those things cost money. To order some small town in Kansas to build bathrooms for a third gender classification means they’ve got to take that money from schools to do it. At some point, Middle America will rather keep that money. I think we’re, hmmm, about ten years away from economic powers arising in Middle America that will create an economic secession and pursue their own economic policies apart from the feds. I predict Texas as the epicenter since they’ve got a huge port and energy resources. Trump proved that Middle America can assert political power. From there, even more, can and will be done.



It needs to be said again: Many of us in this nation no longer have anything in common. Many people identify themselves as something besides “American” first. There is nothing wrong with that, either. But let us be honest and state that we also should be free to pursue our own mutually exclusive socio-economic interests. It will happen. All things arise and pass away. This is another truth in Buddhism. Things come into being and then pass away and become other things. This time is now here in the United States. We are simply not “united” anymore and states are more like a collection of scorpions in a bottle, battling one another for federal funding. This cannot continue and will not continue. The reason states compete is not for federal funding, in truth. It is to recover wealth stolen by the federal government from the states via federal income tax. One day, states will wake up to that and decide to keep that wealth rather than beg the feds for it as alms.

The “self-identity politics” of the Democrats have borne the fruits of such endeavors. If you run around preaching how different we are and demanding everyone bend to the will of whatever someone defines him/herself as, then do not complain when others set themselves apart, too. There are now universities where the faculty has been told that even to say “him” or “her” or “gender specific” titles is to be avoided because it might hurt the feelings of people to whom those gender-specific titles do not apply. Ok, but these are also the people that think they have the right to run around labeling those who disagree with them as “bigots” and “intolerant” and so forth. What, then, can be the expected result of this tearing away at the fabric of cohesiveness?

This isn’t something the conservatives created or manifested out of thin air as a random occurrence all by itself. The United States didn’t collectively wake up one day and say, “Gosh, I think I’ll vote for Donald Trump and do my part of creating a divided nation.” No. The nation was already divided. A series of causes and conditions led up to that. The primary is that groups of people held forth that they were different from everyone else. They alone knew what it was like to suffer hardships. They alone had suffered, yes, and no one who wasn’t one of them knew what it was like. No one but them had ever been persecuted in history. Well, people are more than willing to hear your struggles and make good on past injustices. However, after a time, it became evident that more never was enough. People kept on adding more letters of the alphabet to LGBTQ and creating new minority groups that would, in turn, demand their own political power, concessions, and social accommodations. Again, who created the divisions in our society here? They were being created almost every year in gender identification alone.

Therefore, no one ought to be at all shocked or surprised that the United States is actually on the road to becoming two distinct nations. Middle America has now stated as a political fact that they have nothing in common with Coastal America. That is exactly how the electoral college elected Trump. And the Democrats sit there looking at the Russians? How, exactly, did Russia create these divisions? The liberals will certainly keep right on adding to the causes and conditions that will ultimately lead to secession. You can do a lot of things, but you can’t continue to dictate unpopular policies to an entire land mass that, in truth, you will not be able to control if they decide to go their own way. Number one, your two coasts are divided by them. But more importantly, they control the food. They feed much of the world, too. Right, go tell the world they won’t be able to eat until you get Middle America back under control. I bet the UN would be demanding a “two-state solution” before the ink was dry on an executive order out of the White House insisting Middle America stood down.

Read this message, liberals: Middle America is tired of your BS. Trump is probably the only warning you’re going to get. In fact, Trump is too little, too late. Middle America has nothing in common with Coastal America anymore and hasn’t for a long time now. Middle America feeds you and you’re going to sit there and call them “bigots” and slander them? If Middle America decides not to plant corn just one year, let’s see you eat CDs and DVDs coming out of Hollywood. Let’s see how the rest of the world stands with you when their people are starving as a result. You fail to understand the peril that you are in. Middle America could secede tomorrow and eat. Coastal America would have about two weeks (thanks to the “Just-In-Time” supply system in supermarket distribution schemes) before they began to see food riots. What, California agriculture will save you? Last I checked, they’re bulldozing entire groves of fruit trees thanks to a drought. Right, you geniuses would rather the stars up in Hollywood had nice lawns than you had food security. Don’t forget Arizona controls the Colorado River before it gets to you.

I would humbly suggest that Coastal America starts looking at “local agriculture” as more than some hipster, boutique food fashion selling blue potatoes at $7.99 a pound or kale chips for dogs at $8.25 a bag. You guys better start figuring out how you’re going to FEED that oh-so-superior population majority you keep throwing in our face after this election. Because I think Middle America is getting about done with feeding the ungrateful and whiners. Yes, you have a population majority. But let’s see you feed them.


Jack Perry [send him mail] is a writer living with his wife in the Sonoran Desert where he writes, reads, bakes bread, makes arrows, walks, and documents the foolishness of government itself. When the government is speaking or acting, Jack observes his own Rule Number One: Always Assume It's A Scam. A perennial desert rat, wayfarer, and path pilgrim, Jack also enjoys silence---especially from the government.


IN JANUARY, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decade-long escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reverse, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.

Physical Gold & Silver in your IRA. Get the Facts.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.

Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for him than attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting large media outlets for leading the way. When it comes time to expose actual Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to believe the people and institutions who have demonstrated they are willing to endorse any assertions no matter how factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic tactic no matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of ensuring accuracy?

All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep State unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump: vesting credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a completely unvetted and unverified document, compiled by a paid, anonymous operative while he was working for both GOP and Democratic opponents of Trump, accusing Trump of a wide range of crimes, corrupt acts, and salacious private conduct. The reaction to all of this illustrates that while the Trump presidency poses grave dangers, so, too, do those who are increasingly unhinged in their flailing, slapdash, and destructive attempts to undermine it.

FOR MONTHS, the CIA, with unprecedented clarity, overtly threw its weight behind Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to defeat Donald Trump. In August, former acting CIA Director Michael Morell announced his endorsement of Clinton in the New York Times and claimed that “Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.” The CIA and NSA director under George W. Bush, Gen. Michael Hayden, also endorsed Clinton, and went to the Washington Post to warn, in the week before the election, that “Donald Trump really does sound a lot like Vladimir Putin,” adding that Trump is “the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.”

It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton over Trump. Clinton was critical of Obama for restraining the CIA’s proxy war in Syria and was eager to expand that war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton clearly wanted a harder line than Obama took against the CIA’s long-standing foes in Moscow, while Trump wanted improved relations and greater cooperation. In general, Clinton defended and intended to extend the decades long international military order on which the CIA and Pentagon’s preeminence depends, while Trump — through a still-uncertain mix of instability and extremist conviction — posed a threat to it.

Whatever one’s views are on those debates, it is the democratic framework — the presidential election, the confirmation process, congressional leaders, judicial proceedings, citizen activism and protest, civil disobedience — that should determine how they are resolved. All of those policy disputes were debated out in the open; the public heard them, and Trump won. Nobody should crave the rule of Deep State overlords.

Yet craving Deep State rule is exactly what prominent Democratic operatives and media figures are doing. Any doubt about that is now dispelled. Just last week, Chuck Schumer issued a warning to Trump, telling Rachel Maddow that Trump was being “really dumb” by challenging the unelected intelligence community because of all the ways they possess to destroy those who dare to stand up to them:

And last night, many Democrats openly embraced and celebrated what was, so plainly, an attempt by the Deep State to sabotage an elected official who had defied it: ironically, its own form of blackmail.

Read the Whole Article


Saturday, 14 January 2017 09:23

Why the Left Hates Trump So Intensely

The intensity of the hatred for a newly elected president faced by Donald Trump is equaled only by the reaction of the Confederacy to the election of Abraham Lincoln.  That ended up in civil war, a precedent that one hopes will not be equaled. But there has been a remarkable fury at people who do not shun Trump: boycotts of a company whose shareholder contributed to a PAC supporting  Trump, attempts to pressure the president of a historically black college to prevent its marching band from performing at the inaugural, and hateful rhetoric at Hollywood awards ceremonies. With much more to come.

A useful perspective is to regard this as a religious conflict. Cults behave exactly the way the left is behaving when a member leaves the fold. And remember that Donald Trump used to be a member in good standing of the Democrat cultural machine. He even had a show on NBC, a mainstay of the Left, in addition to being a generous contributor to many Democrats.



An anonymous poster on Reddit offers an interesting take on the religious nature of the conflict (strong language warning). “NotJaffo” writes:

 Why is Hollywood (in particular) freaking out so badly over Trump?

First, because he's a Republican who might actually do the things he said he wanted to do. But second, because this is the first cultural victory the right has scored since Reagan stumbled into one in the '80s.


The left is used to losing political battles. They scream and cry over these but they don't truly panic, because they know that as long as they maintain their hammerlock on the culture, Republicans can't really change anything.

Blue Team Progressivism is a church, offering you moral superiority and a path to spiritual enlightenment. As a church it's got a lot going for it. It runs religious programming on television, all day every day. Every modern primetime program is like a left-wing Andy Griffith show, reinforcing lessons of inclusion, tolerance, feminism, and anti-racism.

Watching a 90-pound Sci-Fi heroine beat up a room full of giant evil men is as satisfying to the left as John Wayne westerns were for the right.

The Blue Church controls the HR department, so even if you don't go to church, you have to act like a loyal churchgoer in every way that matters while you're on the clock. And off the clock, on any kind of public social media platform.

Jon Stewart and John Oliver are basically TV preachers. Watching them gives the same sense of quiet superiority your grandma gets from watching The 700 Club. The messages are constantly reinforced, providing that lovely dopamine hit, like an angel's voice whispering, "You're right, you're better, you're winning."

Hollywood award shows are like church talent shows - the skits and jokes aren't really funny, but it's fun to look at the pretty girls, and you're all on the same team.

The interesting point is that until now,

Red Conservativism is a business, selling a set of political products. They don't make you feel good, they don't appeal to your morality or your spiritual sense of self, but sometimes you really NEED one of their core products like security, jobs, or national defense. Their appeals to "freedom" and "family values" ring hollow these days, but when people are flying planes into buildings, you need a strong member of Conservatism, Inc. in the big chair.

And now this unequal match has changed:

For the first time in decades, voters explicitly rejected the Blue Church, defying hours of daily cultural programming, years of indoctrination from the schools, and dozens of explicit warnings from HR.

We've been trained since childhood to obey the pretty people on TV, but for the first time in decades, that didn't work.

Donald Trump won because flyover America wants their culture back, and Blue Team has not been rejected like that before.

The younger ones have grown up in an environment where Blue Faith assumptions cannot even be questioned, except anonymously by the bad kids on Twitter.

But now the bad kids are getting bolder, posting funny memes that make you laugh even though John Oliver would not approve, like passing crude dirty pictures under the table in Sunday School.

Meryl Streep is panicking because for the first time voters have rejected HER, and everything her faith has taught her to believe.

Donald Trump is not peddling a religion, but he is peddling a counterculture that challenges the “Blue Faith,” as NotJaffo” aptly labels it, And that is the basis of panic.

 And that's what Meryl Streep is really scared of. She's not truly aware of it, just like fluttering housewives couldn't really understand the counterculture threat in 1968. But they feel that something is changing in their safe little world, and they know they have to fight it, because this threat isn't just passing pointless budget resolutions and selling pointless platitudes about family values - these guys mean business, and they're fighting on her turf.

The global warming religion has already folded itself into the Trump hater cult.  The question facing us now is how to deprogram cult members. 


Saturday, 14 January 2017 09:19

White Women's March Madness


In the epic film Titanic, actress Kathy Bates plays the role of Margaret Molly Brown. Of Irish descent, Molly is depicted as a straight-shooting, no-nonsense, wealthy Texan with a penchant for social climbing. However, the smug, condescending aura, exuded by the elites, never washes over her. After escaping the sinking Titanic in a one-third empty lifeboat, surrounded mostly by married women and a few male staff, Molly is appalled by her fellow survivors’ callousness. Molly wants to rescue nearby male passengers, fighting for their lives in the frigid sea. Her lifeboat is less than 200 feet from the men screaming for help. The crew refuse, stating that the suction of the sinking ship will drag them under; rather than rowing towards the men, they must get away as quickly as possible. Undeterred, Molly persists:

I don’t understand a one of you. What’s the matter with you? It’s your men back there! We got plenty a’ room for more.

In response, Molly is told that if she says another word, there will be one less occupant in the boat. None of the other passengers come to Molly’s defense. And so they leave; their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers knowingly betrayed and abandoned to await their cruel death.

The pejorative term “white privilege” has been hurled to date almost entirely against white males. This relatively new addition to America’s litany of purported sins is emerging as a core part of the left’s pantheon of victimization. Non-whites are now victims because Western European and American culture have extant societal structures conferring special privileges to white-skinned people. Especially, white-skinned male people. The only way to remedy this imbalance is to vilify white males and degrade their accomplishments. Concomitantly, income redistribution is justified and criminal behavior recharacterized and excused. J.R. Dunn summed it up aptly:

White privilege is a tactic rather than an idea, and to ask for a specific definition is to ask for something that has never been and can never be… But it does feature one basic element, not easily denied or set aside… That is the contention that benefits – social, economic, academic, and historical – are automatically conferred to an individual simply as a matter of being white.


While elements of this theory may have been true for small segments of the white population in the 1930s, when W.E.B. Du Bois first studied his theory of a global white supremacy, and during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, it is not true today. Yet these tropes have persisted and institutionalized unfettered from the petri dish of academia. The virus permeated mainstream society and exploded onto social media. The deleterious effects are far-reaching, and heretofore unchecked. Only with the 2016 presidential election have white men successfully pushed back.



All the while, instead of sticking up for their white male relatives, as Margaret Molly Brown attempted, many white women joined the assault. Motivated by decades of real and perceived oppression, feminists battled for education, jobs, government grants, and “breaking the glass ceiling” of executive positions and seats on corporate boards. In their zeal for winning at gender identity politics, they ignored the plight of their white male counterparts. The outcome is toxic.

In many of our universities and colleges, white young male students are mandated to endure white male privilege classes. They are being vilified for something they have not done. Hypocritically and paradoxically, they are being punished for the color of their skin. The classes begin with the students being told they must “leave their white privilege at the door.” Then, they must repent, acknowledge their unjust privilege and promise reformation for their white badness. Clearly this is the classic definition of racism, falling under the rubric of a hate crime. This curriculum is also humiliating and abusive. Why would any woman want a brother, son, grandson, or nephew to endure treatment which would be criminal if targeted at a non-white group? Where are the outraged moms? Where are the outraged parents paying up to one quarter of a million dollars for an educational system that assails their male child’s self-esteem?

This unchecked raw prejudice has permeated administrative response to on-campus social interactions as well. Repeatedly, we have seen that when a non-white female accuses a white male or group of white men of sexual improprieties, the guillotine of social injustice is instantly dropped. The males are deemed guilty, ostracized, and often stripped of privileges, before any investigation has been implemented.

Older white men are judged generically and unfairly, embodying Clinton’s basket of deplorable traits: racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and misogynistic. Why aren’t white women saying no? No! My dad and grandfathers and uncles do not possess these awful traits.

On January 21, 2017, one day after the upcoming inauguration of president-elect Trump, one million women plan to converge on Washington, D.C. Planned Parenthood is a co-sponsor. Originally slated as a protest of Trump’s election, the message has morphed into a warning to America. The protest is a mélange of fake fear, faux accusations, and self-entitled delusional self-importance. The organizers claim the march is a “show of solidarity”, at a time when America is marginalizing people of color, the LGBTQ community, rape victims, and abortion procedures. Not only are these claims preposterous, the participants’ angry presence may harm the grateful multitudes in D.C. for celebration.

In an ironic twist, the white feminist protest participants, who have historically done nothing to counter the unfair assault on white men, now find themselves under attack for their perceived white female privilege. White women conceived the protest. Other participants chafed and pushed for diverse leadership. Diverse leadership was achieved. But, many black participants advocated for a black woman only march. One African-American blogger wrote that white women should: “shut up and listen more.” Others chimed in stating that white women should acknowledge their white privilege and leave it at the door. Consequently, some white women have resigned from the march.

One can only hope that with president-elect Trump’s antipathy to pollical correctness, this madness will end. Diversity is the enemy of assimilation.

By Lynne Lechter


Page 1 of 21

Shop thru Us - Save $




c/o Attorney Ronald G. Russo


26 Broadway  - 19th Fl.

New York, NY  10004


(24/7 News Assignment Desk)

Tel.: 917-655-2681 

News Related e-mail:

Editorial Related e-mail:

Web site Administrator:



News Archives (All)