Tonight at eight o'clock at McCormick Place in Chicago, Illinois, Barack Obama will deliver his farewell address, his last major speech as President of the United States. According to various insiders, the 44th President intends to "admonish" his successor as well as to deliver an "action plan," presumably for the legions of future community organizers inspired by the lawlessness of the first and last Alinsky Administration.
And how fitting a location, and in such an appropriate historical context for the last rites of this crooked political machine and its corrupt ideology; The place where this long winter began, eight years ago, when a freshman Senator from Illinois with no resumé other than a rousing speech acceded to the most powerful office on the planet. Coming fresh off the heels of a failed five year punitive expedition in the desert and an economic meltdown that few even understood, the American people rallied around a simple premise: hope and change.
Humiliated abroad and in recession at home, the nation looked to the fluffy idealism of a charming young orator whose election could finally turn the page on America's original sin, an achievement which appealed to a sunny, romantic vision of America. We had tried white forty four times, how about an "African American?" A beautiful and pure distraction, something to look up to, we would make this election about asserting the most high minded principle which eluded the nation for generations.
This largely symbolic gesture that at once satisfied a desire for change, however superficial, and at the same time a much more profound longing for a return to that shining city, enough of surges and bailouts, "all men are created equal" damn it. Tired of the messy, gritty reality of the 21st century, people wanted something new, a change of pace, just some finish line to cross. Senator Obama was elected on a liberal platform: end the wars, stimulate the economy, make healthcare affordable, and unite the country.
Though the New York Times and NBC will attempt to cast Barack Obama as the embattled idealist who in some magical way deserves to be remembered for talking about achieving these things, the people who paid attention for the last eight years will disagree. President Obama's legacy will not be "affordable healthcare," world peace, "stopping the rise of the oceans," or economic prosperity. The first black president will not even be remembered for improving race relations, a tragically ridiculous failure.
Rather, President Obama will be remembered for all of those stories which played for four hours from On the Record at seven to the end of Hannity at eleven on that poisonous network which he continues to blame for his shortcomings. The Obama legacy is ISIS and the destabilization of the Middle East; the mountainous national debt and the monstrosity, Obamacare; the construction of an Orwellian surveillance state, the lying mainstream media cartel, and of course, Donald J Trump. It is no coincidence that the cool grown up hippie from the South Side weaved his personal nightmare into reality by his own hands.
In his inaugural address, Obama praised the American people for choosing hope and unity over fear and discord; and now he will take to the stage tonight to "admonish" those same people for choosing, in his vision, the very opposite to solve the many problems which he leaves unsolved. In fact, Trump will be inaugurated by a country in the same position as it was eight years ago: War in Iraq, economic collapse, and anemic political efficacy. The "progressive" Barack Obama did not lead "The People" to progress but rather around in a circle, a vortex of one man's personal requiem which consumed eight years of time, money, and lives.
Because Barack Obama was a fraud: A progressive who ran as a liberal, an agnostic who preached like a Christian, a Senator who lived in the White House. The Obama years will be remembered as a sham, a strange, lost time of unreality. He promised transparency and just eight years later knighted Hillary Clinton as the torch bearer of his legacy. He promised peace then authorized the bombing of more countries than George W Bush. He promised that the banksters who caused the Great Recession would be held accountabe, then pushed a series of trade deals which sold American sovereignty to them.
He promised political unity but passed Obamacare without a single Republican vote. He promised racial unity and is now the most powerful cheerleader for Black Lives Matter. He promised national unity. Take a look at Barack Obama's speech from twelve years ago at the Democratic National Convention in 2004; a young, humble man laying out a rhetorically magnificent, patriotic sonata of a 21st century American republic that rose to the occasion in its darkest hour. Speaking with conviction and awkwardly gesturing with his hands, endearingly unaccustomed to such a large stage, he made people believe in American Exceptionalism at a time when few did. Yet when the American people chose him to lead their nation, entrusting him with their lives and the futures of their children, he took every opportunity to sling mud at this country, its history, its people, its religion, and its Constitution.
Those dramatic appeals to dreamy passages form the Declaration of Independence were the result of political calculation. Barack Obama was no liberal in the spirit of Jefferson, but a progressive, a cultural Marxist with no spirit, no commitment to a principle beyond power. Beneath the prose which electrified that convention hall with the revolutionary inspiration of a fresh start for the land of the free laid no intention for action or for change, only the ancient lust for power. Senator Obama talked of the righteousness of an America of small business owners, President Obama snidely retorts from atop his throne, "you didn't build that." The long winded speeches with relatable stories and grand ideals were cold rhetorical carpet bombings on the gullible, war weary people of middle America.
This year, the American people didn't fall for it. They didn't elect Trump because of "fear" or "hate" or any other juvenile black cloud floating over the strange ether between Hollywood and Manhattan. Obama is laid to rest and Trump goes to Washington because 2016 was the year that the country stopped buying the bullshit. Eight years ago we were sold "the first African American President" and his hope and change; instead we got an immature Marxist from Indonesia hell bent on forcing his communist father's ideology into law. It is a grand poetic justice that Barack Obama's signature legislation will vanish within months, discarded atop the ash heap of history as a lie, just like the man whose name it bears.
Barack Obama will speak tonight, and it will be televised. It will trend on Twitter, it will dominate the news today and tomorrow; but the country won't be listening. The President addresses the nation on January 2oth; and though Obama doesn't leave the White House until then, he lost the American people a long time ago. Along with Lois Lerner, Jonathon Gruber, James Clapper, Josh Koskinen, Kathleen Sebelius, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and Hillary Clinton, the 44th President is cast off into the vast archives of history as a fraud. Farewell to Barack Obama.
This week President Obama set Fox News and the Republican Party into an anti-UN, pro-Israel frenzy after he refused to veto a Security Council Resolution condemning Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's civilian settlement program in the West Bank. President Elect Trump tweeted that "things will be different," Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz have demanded that the US pull funding from the UN until the resolution is somehow rescinded. The whole of the Right Wing has thrown their arms up in the same tired hissy fit, yelling the same exagerrated platitudes and talking points, "Barack Obama is the most anti Israel President," "Barack Obama is an anti-Semite," "The UN and Obama hate Israel," and on and on.
It is worth pointing out that every American President since 1967 has opposed the Israeli settlement program. It is worth noting that President Obama repeatedly called on Netanyahu to halt the settlement program and instead he accelerated it. Why is it unreasonable that President Obama then refused to veto a Security Council Resolution condemning that very settlement program? Nevermind the debate about whether or not the settlement program is right or wrong, or that the UN is anti-semitic, or any of the noise. There is a very simple cause and effect, and coming from a supporter of Israel, President Obama's decision was appropriate.
But this is beside the point. In the first place, who cares? The Republican establishment seems to be more outraged by Obama's slight to Israel than by the $20 trillion debt, their three decades overdue promise to secure the border, the welfare state, the regulatory state, the Federal Reserve, NSA spying, the failing war on drugs, imminent war with Russia, and so many other important problems facing America. I went to a Ted Cruz rally on the eve of the Iowa Caucus in January of 2015, and despite a half hour warm up by Glenn Beck, the most disturbing part of the evening came when Senator Cruz began describing what his first day in office might look like.
He started with a pretty standard list, turning over Obama's executive orders, tearing up the Iran Deal, and a few other Republican hallmarks; but maybe after item five or six Cruz said he would order the trasnfer of the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I don't disagree that the US embassy ought to be moved from Tel Aviv to the actual capital of Israel, that's common sense, it should be. What I disagree with is that somehow this is a high enough priority that a hypothetical President Cruz executes this order not just on his first day in office, but early on his first day in office!
Here's a little bit of background information for why this is offensive, wrong, immoral, disturbing, and treasonous. In 1788 the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified by the American People to create a federal government which consisted of an executive, legislative, and judicial branch. Through this social contract, the American People agree to delegate certain collective responsibilities to an elected government in order to protect their God given rights. The federal government, the executive branch of government, and the White House itself exist to serve and protect those American People and their country.
And presently this country faces existential threats so numerous that no American should be hearing anything about embassies or Jerusalem on day one, two, or three! This is not an attack on Israel or Jews. This is not pushing an anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist conspiracy. This is not sympathy for Hamas or any other Islamist organization. This prevailing concern is that the American President must put the American people first. After all, I guarantee that Netanyahu didn't promise the Israelis some token concession to the United States on his first day in office!
This country is at war with medieval Islamist barbarians, hurtling towards a shooting war with Russia or China, facing the largest debt bomb in the history of the world, attempting to absorb tens of millions of illegal immigrants, and coming to bear the consequences of the millions of legal immigrants yet to assimilate. Israel may be in peril but so are we, and we are in no position to get tangled up in a 1,300 year old religious blood feud over a piece of desert the size of New Jersey as we stare down a fate similar to the Roman Empire.
For voicing this reasonable position on Twitter, I was labeled an anti-Semite, a racist, a Nazi, a white supremacist, an alt-righter, and even a drunk. That's not playing the victim card, that's to say that for five years mainstream conservatives have beaten identity politics to death, yet turn around and smear anybody skeptical of the Israel obsession in the Republican Party as a bigot. The same movement that for years droned on endlessly with the tired, boring crusade against trigger warnings, safe spaces, and all the rest.
For months I tweeted that the Mexican anti-Trump rioters speaking Spanish and waving their flag ought to go back to Mexico, and not one conservative objected. Yet Ben Shapiro, who made his career off of the crusade against "identity politics" and college leftism decried me as an anti-Semite for suggesting the same thing about Zionists. Unsurpisingly, the entire Jewish-Zionist contigent of Shapiro's publication, Dailywire, descended from their enlightened American patriotism to argue with strawmen and call me a stupid, ignorant, Islamist sympathizing, idiot.
That sounds a lot like identity politics to me. Conservatives will run to the right of Robert Spencer to call Islam cancerous, dangerous, and downright evil, they rebuff accusations of Islamophobia by meekly retreating to the obnoxiously pretentious "facts don't care about your feelings" line. Yet God forbid some "free thinking" conservative dare question the conservative response to Obama's position on one Israeli policy, automatically labeled an anti-Semitic Nazi brownshirt. It is very easy to criticize identity politics while maintaining it for your own tribe; and that is called hypocrisy.
It would do conservatism a lot of good to cut down on the conservative platitudes which have been repeated more times than Seinfeld reruns and start thinking critically. We have enough "guns/God/beer is good" material, we have a consensus on that one. Now that Donald Trump has destroyed the Republican Party, we have an historic opportunity to reshape government and politics in a truly conservative vision, we ought to define it through discussion and critical thought rather than regurgitation. Conservatives have punched through accusations of racism, xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia, and transphobia to tell the truth, we ought to defeat all false accusations of bigotry. We ought to put America First again.
By now, anybody who watches the news has become acquainted with the latest conservative bogeyman designed by George Soros to fill the nightmares of dutiful progressive voters: the Alt Right. This formerly remote and fringe sect of the Right Wing came to prominence during the 2016 Republican primary, riding off of Donald Trump's surging internet popularity on underground forums like 4Chan, 8Chan, and to a lesser extent, Reddit. Though the "alt right" apparently originated as a minuscule network of far right extremists principally dedicated to white nationalism, the term has become increasingly amorphous and subjective as it has been appropriated by younger, edgier conservative activists distinguishing themselves from old guard establishment Republicans.
There are many competing schools of thought on the ideological and political state of the alt right as it exists in the wake of Donald Trump's nomination and election to the presidency. Probably the earliest, and most comprehensive analysis comes from Breitbart news editor, Milo Yiannopoulos, who claimed to merely give the movement "a fair hearing in the press," by distinguishing between the varying factions of new conservatives who self identify as alt right. This theory posits that the alt right manifests itself in degrees from innocent meme machines creating mischief on social media to the one to three thousand white supremacists who idolize Hitler.
On the other side of the debate is Ben Shapiro, editor in chief of The Daily Wire and #NeverTrump-er, who along with many in the new and old establishment condemn the alt right as a vehicle for anti-semitism, Neo-Nazism, racism, and the true "basket of deplorables" which lurks in the outermost fringe of the American right. Mainstream conservatives like Shapiro view the tempered, sterilized alt right described by Milo as fruit from the poisonous tree, irrevocably wedded to, and conceived by, an illiberal band of Nazi thugs and bullies.
A conciliatory, two-state solution was proposed by Paul Joseph Watson of Infowars this week which separates the alt-right into two definitive camps, divorced from one another. Watson acknowledges the anti-semitic and dangerous coalition of Hitler revanchists which Shapiro warns of as the first and odious generation of the alt right; and the emerging counter crusade of citizen journalists, anti-establishment conservatives, and newly christened Trump Republicans as the mainstream, legitimate second generation of alt-right.
According to Hillary Clinton, the alt right is a a vast right wing conspiracy engineered by Russian President Vladimir Putin to install ethno-nationalist, Russophile puppets as heads of state across Europe and the West. Moreover, the brilliant KGB tactician in the Kremlin is responsible for Brexit, Wikileaks, Donald Trump, and the transformation of harmless green frog cartoon Pepe into a universal symbol for white supremacism. It is safe to say that the adults can scratch this one off the list; that pneumonia must be really taking a toll on the mental state of the first failed female presidential candidate from a major party.
Unfortunately, unlike the broad American umbrella ideologies of conservatism, liberalism, and to a lesser extent socialism and libertarianism, the battle to define the alt right in particular has real practical, political consequences. Milo says to give them a fair hearing, Paul Watson says there's actually two alt rights, Ben Shapiro says no alt right is acceptable and we have to destroy them. Meanwhile the liars and propagandists on CNN and NBC wax dramatically throughout their 24 hour news cycle about the white supremacist Trumpenreich that lies dormant ready to grab all the women by their genitals, force Muslims into concentration camps, hunt down black people, electrocute gays, and send a gestapo like deportation force to exile all Hispanics.
The incessant infighting and petty bickering between jealous, competitive Twitter stars over the most appropriate definition for a group of trouble makers that, by the way, fields less members than students at my high school, plays right into the hands of the powerful globalist forces aligned against us. Donald Trump won more votes than any Republican presidential candidate in US history; from Wisconsin to Texas, from Maine to Arizona, 62.5 million Americans voted for a moderate conservative in the most contentious election in history. Yet the mainstream media, an unofficial arm of the Democrat Party, has so engineered the national dialogue to focus with a microscope's precision on the 1,600 active white supremacist trolls on Twitter instead; and arrogant "intellectuals" on the right let them.
It has been but three weeks since the unprecedented, biblical, political earth quake that vaporized the Democrat Party, destroyed the last shred of the mainstream media's legitimacy, and propelled the Republican Party to its most dominant posture since 1928. Not to mention that this glorious victory was not easily delivered by a spineless Republican establishment begging on its knees for minority votes in exchange for amnesty; Trump led us to the promised land by punching through every conventional and common sense practice which leashed conservatism to a default strategy of apology and concession.
Conservatives ought to talk about the miracle that took place this year for the next century! Donald Trump, the real estate mogul turned reality TV star who said illegal immigrants bring drugs, crime, and rapists, won possibly the greatest Republican victory in US history. For four years, a Republican Congress, Supreme Court, and White House will have the power and the mandate to fix a broken immigration system, a corrupt Washington DC, a disastrous foreign policy, and more. With this great victory fresh in our minds, with the great work being done and yet to be done, we waste our breaths and give air time to legitimize 1,600 disturbed white supremacist losers? In the sage words of the President Elect, "Wrong! Sad!"
Liberals don't talk about the communists and cop killers in the Democrat Party because the mainstream narrative has it that of course no sensible, mainstream Democrat supports such extremism; therefore you'll never see Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton disavowing the Castro lovers in their own party. This is a reasonable axiom that Democrats have maintained through confidence. Now, as the ruling party, Republicans must develop the same scoffing, default position, that we won't even entertain the notion that our base, our President, or our representatives sympathize with extremists.
It was exactly because of the left's smothering obsession with racism and bigoted "isms" that the provocative and edgy alt right gained traction beside Donald Trump. If Republicans can take a page out of the President Elect's playbook by becoming more frank, straightforward, and human, they can co-opt the virtues of the alt right and leave its dangerous core to whither and die. The new conservative ascendancy has given us the opportunity to control the narrative, at long last we have the power to right the ship and do so on our terms. Richard Spencer and his controlled opposition can have the alt right, the plain old Donald Trump right will lead the nation to Make America Great Again.
Nearly three weeks after the election of Donald Trump and the Right can breathe a sigh of relief. In vanquishing Hillary Clinton, America has been spared from World War III with Russia, the abrogation of our Constitution, the imposition of one party rule through blanket amnesty, and quite possibly the beginning of a slow death for the Republic. Galvanized by the leadership of President Elect Trump, the American People have beaten back the tide of establishment power in Washington DC to restore the sovereignty of the governed over their government.
With a Republican President, Republican controlled Congress, and soon to be conservative leaning Supreme Court, the next administration will have the power and the mandate to right the wrongs of twenty plus years of corporatist rule. More significantly, with a strong Cabinet to support the President Elect, Donald Trump will have possibly the last opportunity to radically reform America's political institutions without violent insurrection. The nation waits patiently on the cusp of the next act in the 240 year American ascendancy, a great restoration; if only Trump can successfully adapt conservative principle to brutal political reality.
Enter the present civil war within the Republican Party. Just which principles will define American conservatism in the age of Trump? Throughout the election and already in the unfinished Cabinet of the next administration, factions have begun to emerge and compete for supremacy in the new ruling party. While the dissonant cacophony of angry conservative voices raged together in opposition to a Democratic President and broken Republican establishment for eight years, now this militia must govern.
In this election, that silent majority found their voice in Trump; and this broad coalition is unified by little more than a shared hatred for the status quo. It is doubtful that an anti-trade, non-interventionist, big government, lifetime Democrat could rally Republicans from Maine to Arizona in any other year under different circumstances. Trump is a brilliant opportunist to craft such an impossible political campaign in this climate, but it will be very difficult to transcribe his promises into policy on paper without vast swaths of the anti establishment constituency feeling betrayed in some way.
Trump's Republican Party will orbit around his patriotic-populist governing philosophy which can be summed up so simply and elegantly as "America First," a sharp departure from orthodox conservative methodology. The fabled parties of Goldwater and Reagan were defined by ideology, by hard principles such as constitutionalism, individual rights, and economic freedom. The tragic results of this high minded approach to the nasty game of politics were, respectively, a crushing electoral defeat in 1964 and a series of small political gains reversed within a decade under George Bush and his "New World Order."
The Party of Trump, like the Party of Nixon is a coalition which has been thrust into power to get things done. As conservatives, we admire Reagan's eloquence and his commitment to those timeless principles which have secured for us the American way of life, the only civilized way to live; but we also must come to grips with his abject political failure to institutionalize his own hard fought reforms. Eight years of Reagan begot a ruling elite of Bush's, Clinton's, and other connected insiders which have pillaged the American taxpayer of his wealth, his liberties, and his political power for a quarter of a century.
Trump's "America First" model is not an expression of philosophy or sociology, but purely of policy, as it should be. The core tenets of America's new conservative party will not be long winded commitments to utopian visions but acute directions for government action. America First will manifest in four primary areas: immigration, trade, foreign policy, and institutional reform. On immigration, at long last, we will fulfill the 35 year old Republican promise to secure the border with an "impenetrable, physical, tall, powerful, beautiful, southern border wall," and Mexico will pay for it. Not only will this promise be redeemed but in this new party, immigration will be a priority and it will be discussed from the axiom that immigration exists as a government program to benefit Americans.
Trade will be a crucial issue to secure electoral gains in the Midwest and Northeast and so it should and probably will remain a central part of the Trump Party platform. This is probably the most divisive issue within the Republican camp as it divides the free market fundamentalists and the left leaning protectionists; but Trump has introduced a practical compromise. The present trade arrangement is not free trade, and the advancement of intercontinental deals like the TPP, TiSA, TTIP, NAFTA, and others compromise national sovereignty. Both the free traders and protectionists agree that these have to go, and in the meantime Trump can campaign on this and win the rust belt.
The President Elect will elicit even more derision still from the conservative establishment with his practical approach to world order. Thankfully, the Party of Trump can reintroduce America to her default non-interventionist posture in foreign affairs. The Bush family and plenty of hawkish political institutions have worked very hard to brand non-interventionists as dangerous isolationists from the 1930s that will recreate Hitler; but in actuality the Cold War, and its interventions, was the exception, not the rule for American diplomacy. Eisenhower's military industrial complex has overstayed its welcome by 25 years and both small government and fiscal conservatives should invite Trump to follow through with his promise to end the perpetual war for global hegemony.
The last and most important reform which Trump can graft onto American conservatism is the anti-establishment crusade to drain the swamp which propelled him into office. While Trump has done the country a great service in simply defeating Hillary Clinton, and while he can make tremendous strides in immigration, trade, and foreign policy, he can be among the Presidents on Mount Rushmore if he can fix Washington, if just for a moment. As Reagan and Obama learned the hard way, most policy issues which face the nation are fixable, though only a symptom of a systemic, corrupt order which rules from the highest perches of power. If the ruthlessly pragmatic and patriotic lion of this populist revolution can shepherd the nation back to a system of self government and sovereignty, then we can strive for conservative principle and its preservation.
While we root for the President Elect to make these changes and to succeed, moving forward, conservatives must be weary of Donald Trump. Over the course of the last nineteen months, it was necessary to present a unified front against such an ubiquitous enemy in the media, the establishment, and the Clinton machine to install Trump in office. Dissent and criticism against Trump was suppressed by a very vocal and dangerously sycophantic sect of the right which was reasonable given the risks and perils that loomed with the possibility of a Clinton White House. Now that the dust has settled and the revolution has survived, it is important to remember that Trump is a mortal man, and now a politician with great power; and as such susceptible to the same corruption we task him to fight.
The Right gave him the White House and a favorable balance of power in Congress and the Supreme Court, it is our obligation to hold him accountable for his promises and for his actions as he governs. The current administration ought to serve as an example of the self destruction wrought by an absence of introspection, and if the right is to rise above the failures of the petulant narcissist currently in the White House, we have to hold Trump accountable in the next administration. There is a conservative renaissance on the horizon in America, and it can succeed if we commit Trump to principle as he governs pragmatically.
At the third and final presidential debate last week, Donald Trump resumed his professional career of making liberals' heads explode by suggesting that he would not accept the results of the election, "I'll keep you in suspense," he said. Naturally, those same liberals who read gay marriage into the fourteenth amendment and the individual mandate into the Commerce Clause took to NBC and CNN to lecture Trump on the sanctity of American tradition. While the Deplorables heard in this a totally valid and reasonable threat to contest proven Democrat voter fraud, the alarmists in media heard the rally cry of an authoritarian tyrant intent on raising a militia to seize the White House and cancel democracy.
Hillary Clinton and her media lapdogs bemoaned this as "dangerous" rhetoric, a threat to America's longstanding commitment to the peaceful transition of power, as was demonstrated in the democratic transition to independence in 1776 and the abolition of slavery in 1865. He has gone after Mexicans, Muslims, the disabled, women, blacks, Jews, puppies, babies, orphans, ice cream, and now democracy itself! This has become the refrain of the shills in media and government supporting Hillary, that somehow this corrupt, lying felon is the vanguard of democracy in America.
The hypocrisy and ridiculousness of this narrative aside, just why is it that democracy is the one feature of American government atop all others? Democracy does not cause or create freedom, peace, or prosperity. The word democracy cannot be found in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. In fact, it just so happens, that America is a republic, not a democracy. And yet from our earliest school days we are taught that somehow our right to select which crooks steal our money in Washington DC every two years is the highest form of government. It isn't.
Democracy means nothing more or less than the sovereignty of a plurality. Though in America the word may draw connotations of freedom or liberty or human rights, there are more illiberal, tyrannical democracies in the world today than there are free ones. Iran has democracy and is ruled by a regime of radical Shi'ite clerics. Venezuela has democracy and the government regularly kidnaps its citizens. The United Kingdom has democracy and you can be arrested for trolling someone on Twitter. Democracy secures nothing more than the rule by the will of the largest faction, which is why our transition into democracy has witnessed the introduction of a federal government exponentially beyond the size and scope authorized by the Constitution.
The most important feature of American government is republican sovereignty, the concept that each individual has unalienable rights which cannot be infringed by any government whether it be state, federal, democratic, or tyrannical. The American conception of government is not merely the selection of representatives to rule with absolute power as it currently functions but that through our Constitution, we delegate to a government certain responsibilities which cannot be satisfied in separation. It is from this revolutionary document that the federal government derives authority to spend money on a finite and precise series of provisions and to execute a finite and precise number of societal functions.
Since the ratification of the 17th Amendment which progressives hailed as a great achievement in democratization, we have slowly seen the Constitution eroded by an increasingly ignorant electorate and the tyrannical tendencies of a national majority. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, Obamacare, NATO, the United Nations, the Federal Reserve, not one of these programs which consume a majority of public revenues are authorized by the Constitution from which the government is supposed to derive its powers. This is not a judgement on the merit of any of the programs, though they may be good or desirable, each and every one is unconstitutional and therefore unlawful, illegal.
While the ignorant electorate shrugs at the Constitutional sins of the present government because its effects may not be so bad, this is a disaster with catastrophic repercussions. A government which has gone tyrannical and begun to invent its own powers is not scary or alarming when giving money to the poor or making healthcare affordable, or all the other seemingly benevolent acts of coercion which win Democrats votes. But when a government, and in this present case government means a very specific class of connected monied and political interests, knows that it can reach beyond its Constitutional jurisdiction, there is no limit to its power. Though Democrats love that their party's name has democracy in it because their 5th grade civics teacher taught them that we fought the revolutionary war so that we can vote for president, the principal goal of the American government was to limit its own power.
If the Constitution does not restrict government power to impose Obamacare on the 50 sovereign states of the Union, the Constitution does not restrict government power to suppress free speech. If the Constitution does not restrict government power to impose a prohibition on drugs, the Constitution does not restrict government power to start confiscating guns. Leftists call this alarmism but their only retort is that government isn't likely to do this because in the absence of a functioning constitutional order, of course it can do all of these things.
This is why Hillary Clinton must be resisted through undemocratic means if Donald Trump does not win through democratic means. In her four years as president, she would be nominating up to four Supreme Court justices who would eviscerate the Constitution and the Bill of Rights; there can be no liberal democracy without freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or the right to bear arms. She will provide a "pathway to citizenship" for up to 11 million illegal immigrants and possibly more, forever flipping swing states like Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Florida into solid blue territory.
These two developments alone would disqualify either party if they stood to take advantage of them. That the Democrats stand to control the presidency, the Supreme Court, and the Senate and hold all of these positions ad infinitum due to demographic manipulation of the electoral map should disturb even the most radical leftists. Both Republicans and Democrats complain of the tyranny of a two party globalist establishment, yet there is one arrangement somehow more terrifying and authoritarian than that, a one party state ruled by the queen crony herself, Hillary Clinton.
The Founders were clear about this eventuality. They knew that there would come a day when this American government, like all governments throughout history, would become corrupted and tyrannical. Through their graves they urge us to pursue the peaceful and legitimate means of the government which they created; and if that fails, then to take up arms and remind the professional politicians who runs this country. We are told that this violates the democratic process, but to hell with the democratic process if we continue down the rabbit hole of corporatist, globalist tyranny in the name of the ballot box.
For years we have had to docilely accept the status quo spoon fed to us on late night TV and by political mouthpieces from both teams. We swallowed two senseless and expensive wars in the Middle East which begot only terror, debt, and death. We have swallowed 25 years of free trade and the gutting of the American economy by treasonous multinational corporations and their pawns in government. We have gagged on the forced transformation of our culture into a suicidal mantra of tolerance at any cost. Not any more.
If necessary, we must fight. Not one politician in Washington will deliver us our constitutional rights because that is not a program which profits the banksters and the stock market, but they will be in for a rude awakening the day that the sleeping giant in the American people comes to take their country back. We must prepare for that day, if only by affirming that this day will come and that it must.
Last night, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton shared a stage for one final time in the most substantive, and so admittedly the most boring, contest of the debate series so far. While many expected a bloody blockbuster title fight between two brass knuckled political titans, the sainted Chris Wallace was able to singlehandedly halt the momentum of the media and both candidates in their rhetorical race to the bottom. From the outset, with a solid question on the Supreme Court, Wallace proved himself to be in a league of his own among the shills and hacks in the political press who have facilitated the most divisive election in our time.
Without the static noise of sensationalist mud slinging and explicit media bias, Hillary Clinton was exposed as the crooked, smug fraud who we all know her to be. When asked about the undeniable and well documented evidence of the Clinton Foundation's pay-for-play racket with evil foreign regimes, Clinton brushed it off with a laugh and a well rehearsed pivot. When asked whether or not she would shoot down a Russian jet, the inevitable result of her proposed no fly zone over Syria, Hillary shrugs it off, apparently we'll figure that one out in 2017.
On the nuclear question, Hillary attempted to smear Trump, deliberately mischaracterizing a quote on foreign policy to support one of her campaign's many lies, that Trump wants a nuclear Saudi Arabia; and then something magical happened: Trump fact checked her, on the spot and with unequivocal sincerity and precision. And how did SNL's darling "badass" Hillary respond? She shriveled up and retreated like the cowardly, lying crook that she is.
Trump, with humor and with heart won on every topic. If he was a lion in the second debate, he was a hawk in the third, surgically executing each subject with force. While Hillary stuttered and stumbled, failing to even hold eye contact with the audience as she struggled to stay on script, frantically checking her notes, Trump spoke with conviction. On abortion, Trump made a case nearly as strong as his running mate's for life. On immigration, Trump exposed Hillary's globalist agenda for that "hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders." And as a grand finale, Trump spoke for all of us as he so often does when he made Hillary own her hateful snark, "such a nasty woman."
CNN's focus group handed Trump the win by 10-5. The YouGov shock poll posted a Trump victory 61-39 among independents and third party voters. New polls by Rasmussen and LA Times have him leading nationally once again. We are on the cusp of the third and most miraculous comeback.
After two crushing debate victories, it is easy to forget that less than two weeks ago, Donald Trump was left for dead. In the wake of a scandal so contrived and so sensationalized that Stalin himself would call it over the top, not even Trump's own running mate remained solidly in his corner. With that silly tape running on repeat for nearly 48 hours on every major news network, top Republican operatives from Paul Ryan to Ted Cruz to Mike Pence jumping ship, and mounting pressure for Trump to drop out just one month before the election, it appeared that the unthinkable had happened: The Trump was stumped.
Though there had been similar outrage and scandal before, this one seemed different. Something felt viscerally wrong. An overwhelming sense of dread, a sense of certain doom consumed the Trump train. For the first time, the madman seemed cornered, the enemy advancing on all fronts. Under the influence of establishment operative Conway, Trump's response was a tepid, meek apology, as even the great madman bowed to the immensity of the political earthquake which tore a hole in the earth between him and the White House.
The downward spiral only accelerated the following day. As Mike Pence cancelled events across the country, rumors began to spread of an emergency mechanism in the RNC rulebook to pull the plug on Trump's great populist revolution and install another candidate on the ticket in his stead. With no word from Trump, no rallies, and seemingly no plan, the right was turned upside down in a chaotic riot of confusion and an unbearable feeling of helplessness and injustice. We had only one prayer: that somehow, Trump could turn it all around before a stage of tens of millions in the second debate that Sunday.
Our prayer was answered. Cornered and under assault from every front, the enemy had nowhere to run. Broken free from his chains, the madman came roaring back, louder than a bomb. That nuclear leak which the media had schemed and saved for so long, the silver bullet to pierce the teflon Don lay defused within the opening fifteen minutes of the debate. A scandal which would have killed any mortal man, which threatened the extinction of the Republican Party, which heralded the end of the rebellion against the new world order, crumbled to dust in the mighty hands of The Donald.
Anderson Cooper, Martha Raddatz, and Hillary Clinton watched in horror as their only effective weapon against the executor of their divine retribution melted before his steely gaze. And then it was Trump's turn. Going on the offensive, he dominated Hillary Clinton like a gorilla dominates a child in a Cincinnati zoo, only this time, not even the snipers were safe from the wrath of this blonde simeon. Trump stalked old Crooked around the stage, as though he could smell her crimes and her lies on her insincere breath. The cameramen earned their paycheck that night, desperately searching for an angle to capture this barbaric display of power in which Trump did not physically tower over Hillary.
Though most don't realize it yet, "you'd be in jail" will go down in history as the quote from this debate series, possibly this election. This one liner will go down in the books with "you're no Jack Kennedy," "We the People," and "And then there was light." Facing certain doom, the cosmic force that is Donald Trump only intensified to a state so energetic and powerful that his sheer will dominated the American political and media establishment which tried in vain to destroy him.
And this was only the beginning. Trump's debate performance rekindled the burning passion which launched this movement one year ago. The seed had been planted. The media declared war on the American people with that leak. The elites in DC and in Manhattan thought that they could determine this election with blanket coverage of a "Trumped up" scandal, that they could seize their dreams of open trade and open borders. They thought us so stupid and meek that a silly scandal, some ridiculous tape from one decade ago would so distract us that they could steal this election.
They thought wrong. The media wanted a war with the American people, they got it. Following the debate, Wikileaks brought out the big guns, publishing devastating leaks which indict the White House, the State Department, the Department of Justice, and the Clinton campaign of federal crimes. "But Russia!" Cried the Democratic operatives on CNN and CSPAN as leaks continue to be published daily, to this day, exposing the high crimes of the national political machine.
The counterassault continued this week with the release of two viral videos by Project Veritas which document video evidence of Clinton campaign operatives confessing their role in initiating violence at Trump's rallies and widespread voter fraud (Watch and share with friends). Recently, WeSearchr, a new organization founded by citizen journalists Charles Johnson and Pax Dickinson, has posted a $5,000 reward for hard evidence of voter fraud on voting day.
The unprecedented rise of citizen journalism induced and inspired by Donald Trump has given a voice to the voiceless. We are the silent majority no longer, as now anybody with a smartphone can be enlisted in this historical civil war to take the country back. This last act, the third and final comeback in the Trump campaign is the climax of this year's election, a Hobbesian political war of all against all.
And we will win. Bigly. We have the most effective and decentralized political movement since the Viet Cong. We are fighting for freedom, for the Constitution, for law and order, and for the safety of our loved ones from radical Islam. We are fighting for jobs, for peace, for common sense, and to make our country great again. Who do they have? Tim Kaine? That shrill harpy, kooky Elizabeth Warren? What are they fighting for? Stronger together? What does that even mean? War with Russia? There is a reason that Donald Trump is filling stadiums and Hillary can't fill a high school gym; because the American people are fed up, and we're not taking it anymore.
In the final hour, the establishment is panicking. We hear on the nightly news that comrade Hillary is winning by ten points (If you oversample Democrats by 26 points) and that the election is essentially over. We hear that Trump is losing in every poll, that Trump has lost every debate, that the Trump has been stumped. Why is it then that John Kerry is pushing so hard to get Julian Assange extradited back to the US to silence him? Why are Republican campaign offices being attacked across the country? Why does every national poll now have to dramatically oversample Democrats to post a small lead for Hillary? Why is the Clinton campaign firing those people indicted in James O'Keefe's "propaganda" videos?
According to the mainstream media, the establishment should be doing a victory lap, though it looks a lot like a series of hail Mary's as Donald Trump rises for his third and greatest comeback. After the failed assassination attempt by his own party, Trump is no longer shackled to a polite strategy or a losing political operative and as last night's debate showed, this Trump can win.
Now it's our turn to put one of our own on the inside. Every four years another phony political hack is selected out of a harem of beltway insiders to execute the corrupted will of their corporate masters. Every four years we get a phony, two faced, lying politician and this year we get the queen of them all, Hillary Clinton. And which words did she choose for her latest charade last night, her public or private positions? What experimental stimulants was she hopped up on that she didn't collapse due to heat exhaustion (I hear the debate hall was well over seventy degrees!)?
With Donald Trump, what we see is what we get: An imperfect man with bad table manners and a crude sense of humor; but an honest patriot at that. Those that fear an outsider in the Oval Office do not have concerns with Donald Trump, but with democracy. They don't fear Donald Trump, they fear the will and competence of the sovereign American people.
For some reason these people are more comfortable entrusting the lives of themselves and their families to the expertise of a hack, a lap dog, an empty suit bureaucrat to prolong a status quo which has poisoned this nation rather than risk the perils of freedom. One thing is for sure, these people do not have the courage or the guts to win this war. Though they may have us outgunned in every influential institution, they don't have the heart. Any man donning a Make America Great Again hat is a patriot willing to take a beating for his love of country, and there are millions of him just waiting to sign the death warrant of America's elite on November 8th.
A wise man once said, it's not about the money, it's about sending a message. Some people would have preferred Bernie Sanders, some preferred Ted Cruz; regardless of primary preference we are now all united in this last great struggle for bloodless revolution. A cartel which controls the media, the press, the White House, the Congress, Hollywood, Wall Street, and the UN is too dangerous to be kept alive, regardless of its ideology. We have been afforded a remarkable man, a miraculous campaign, and now by divine intervention we have this leviathan establishment on the ropes, asking to be executed; we must oblige it.
This is a call to action to all American who still believe in the sanctity of law and in the sovereignty of the individual. The heavy lifting is done for us. Patriots like Julian Assange and James O'Keefe put their lives on the line to bring us tweetable links. Tweet them! Trump has allowed his name to be slandered and his legacy destroyed to give us a voice. Speak up! And 240 years ago the American patriots spilled their blood and gave their lives to free us from government tyranny, to govern ourselves at the ballot box. Vote! With less than a month left in this scorched earth campaign, there is no doubt that the media hit job on Trump will only intensify. We must remember what is at stake or so help us God.
What a headache this whole affair has turned out to be. Hacked emails, sex scandals, twitter feuds, formerly the stuff of political satire now dominates the nightly news. Hillary Clinton refuses to retire that lone successful talking point, everyone's favorite Michelle Obama quote, "when they go low, we go high," and yet each day both sides discover new lows in this shameful race to the bottom. If the intention of the political establishment and their media lap dogs is to crank up the white noise to such an unbearable frequency that the American people throw their hands up and cry "uncle!" to stop their ears from bleeding, it's working.
We don't care about Paul Ryan's endorsement, we don't care about impolite words that Trump said 30 years ago, and we don't care about his tax returns. In the words of the madman himself, "it's political bullshit." And is there no better way to describe our present situation? It would be comical if the stakes weren't so great.
While CNN and NBC were reporting about that time in 1970 when Trump kissed a pretty girl and while Fox News was reporting about Bill Clinton's Wall Street speeches, storm clouds have rolled in over Washington DC. To the surprise of many, the United States is rapidly accelerating towards war with Iran and Russia. If the news media was doing their job, this would be the headline in the New York Times and on CNN rather than hit pieces paid for by Clinton surrogates.
Yesterday, the United States become militarily involved in the Yemeni Civil War; and Iranian war ships have now been mobilized to intercept the US navy near the Gulf of Aden.
Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin issued an urgent warning for all Russian statesmen living abroad to immediately return to Russia with their families. Last week, Russia conducted a 38 million person nuclear war preparedness drill and their government is currently running an ad campaign to advise citizens to familiarize themselves with their local fallout shelter.
This month, Russia will be mobilizing their single aircraft carrier to the Mediterranean Sea, which will be making a brief stop in the English Channel to conduct drills for their air force on the coast of France and the United Kingdom. Yesterday, the Obama administration announced that the US will be launching a cyber attack on Russia to "humiliate the Kremlin" and is considering conducting air strikes in Syria against the Assad regime; it is important to note that President Putin has explicitly said that this would cross a red line. Unlike our dope smoking empty suit, President Putin takes red lines seriously.
While we were sleeping, the Obama administration has singlehandedly escalated this new cold war into an outright conflict between the two greatest nuclear and conventional military powers on the planet. If this threat seems like it came out of a clear blue sky, that's because it did. For years, Russia has embarrassed and humiliated a weak President unwilling to assert American interests, only now have Obama and Kerry found the courage to stand up to Putin. And what reason might the President have to initiate a limited conflict with Russia all of a sudden? After all, there is a presidential election only 24 days away!
For 25 years America has fielded a military more powerful than every other nation combined and an economy larger than that of the continent of Europe. In the conservative vision we could have had peace, wealth, and freedom. In the liberal vision we could have had universal healthcare, tuition-free university, and racial harmony. Everything and more could have been attempted or realized as American power remains unchallenged for decades to come.
All we had to do was not initiate a nuclear holocaust. This is the ballot in November. Never mind Trump and Hillary or Red and Blue, in light of recent developments, this election is between the populist reproach with Russia and establishment war with Russia. I hope I'm not being too dogmatic when I say that all other considerations ought to be subordinated to the threat of an apocalyptic nuclear war of all against all.
Of course there are still people who believe that Trump is the greater threat to the survival of the country, and this is understandable. As an outsider with no experience in government, Trump is a wildcard. Nobody can know for certain how he might govern and in what direction he will lead the nation before the world stage. He could command the respect of foreign leaders and become a pioneer in the restoration of friendly cooperation with Russia; he could work with China to abort rogue states like North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan, and the flames which engulf the world could be extinguished.
Given that Trump is not married to an interventionist or utopian ideology which calls him to invent democracies in the desert or reshape the world order, it's a good bet that at the very least, things wouldn't get much worse. The military industrial complex which commands Congress and the Clinton Foundation couldn't buy a President Trump, and neither could any foreign lobbyists. Therefore, the two known variables with Trump are that he errs on the side of non-intervention and that he will put American interests first, that's more than can be said about any president since Ronald Reagan.
With Hillary Clinton, we know exactly what we're getting: The disastrous Iran Deal will become permanent and the Ayatollah will be all but guaranteed a nuclear capability in exactly ten years. The acquisition of a nuclear arsenal by a radical Shi'ite regime will trigger an arms race across the Middle East, probably paving the way for a nuclear Egypt, Turkey, and Syria. It sounds almost like a bad joke: what happens when you give four warring radical Muslim states a nuclear arsenal? Doesn't take much imagination to figure out the result.
Hostilities with Russia will continue to escalate, where they go beyond here is a mystery that I'm sure nobody is eager to find out. As Wikileaks continues to put Hillary Clinton's bid for the presidency in jeopardy, we can expect that the Clintons and the Democratic establishment will harbor a personal vendetta against President Putin as he continues to be blamed for hacking attacks against the DNC. For the first time in history, a Hatfields and McCoys blood feud will be settled with weapons of mass destruction. Everyone loses.
Hillary Clinton's declared policy is to implement a no fly zone over Syria and if elected, she will get her no fly zone. Vladimir Putin will contest it. A Russian plane will go down, war will be inevitable. This is deadly serious. There is no plan B, the UN can do nothing, no power on earth or beyond can save us when that button gets pressed. Hell will visit earth.
To the most ardent liberals who see in Trump a crazy, sexist, racist, xenophobic authoritarian: We've had a madman in the White House, his name was Nixon. We've had a misogynist cad in the White House, his name was Clinton. We've had a racist in the White House, his name was Wilson. We've had a xenophobe in the White House, his name was Teddy Roosevelt. We've had a tyrant in the White House, his name was Franklin Roosevelt. We have never had a President prepared to risk a nuclear confrontation over a civil war in the Middle East. If we ever do, God help us. She will surely be our last.
Donald Trump was pronounced dead on Friday. After everything we've been through, that dreaded day which haunted us in our nightmares finally came. That defining moment in the passage of time when the present colored the past as tragedy, the great campaign a fruitless folly now, in hindsight. All the hopes and dreams of a people, the faith of a nation riding on the mortal strength of one man to save us all and at last dying a mortal death with him. The great philanthropist who descended from the clouds on a golden escalator to capture the imagination of millions, inevitably humbled, ridiculed, and buried by the dirty hands of a corrupted order.
And how revealing, the silver bullet which seemingly stumped the Trump. The media branded him a sexist, a racist, a xenophobe, an islamophobe, a homophobe, a white supremacist, a Nazi, a fascist, an isolationist, a liberal, a con artist, a sociopath, a warmonger, a Russian spy, an anti-semite, a conspiracy theorist, and most troublingly, a Democrat. Yet the great cross on which he would be crucified in this upside down dystopia was the practice of the oldest and most foundational of male bonding rituals: the locker room talk. For all his might, this great American titan was felled by an intrinsically human expression; and at the hands of his own party.
Every great conspiracy requires a Judas. In his darkest hour, with his back broken and his high energy stamped out, Trump's newly gained peers in the serpent's lair of politics turned to save themselves. On a not so good Friday, Trump was crucified, friendless. At last, the great Donald Trump bled, and he wept. Everything that had been achieved, this revolution of, by, and for the people, now lost, buried atop the ash heap of history. On Saturday we were forced to reckon with the alternative to Ronald Reagan's great rendezvous with destiny, that sentence to one thousand years of darkness, as we faced the loss of the last best hope of man on earth.
Though his legacy remained, he had chosen no worthy successor to see this civilizational struggle through to its conclusion. In his defeat we saw the end of our republic: the infiltration of this country by barbarians to destroy our culture; the continued pillaging of this country by monied interests to destroy our wealth; and the perpetual sacrifice of this country in war against foreign powers by a bloodthirsty shadow government to destroy our lives. The Supreme Court would preside over the immolation of our Constitution as the legalization of millions of immigrants insured the rule of a one party state against electoral defeat until the end of time. Broken and dispirited, the Trump Train derailed and watched, helplessly, as our beloved conductor, our champion, descended into hell.
And on the third day, he rose again. When every leader in his own party left him for dead, when half of his own supporters renounced him, and when the entire establishment opened up the earth to swallow him, with his back pressed up against the wall facing certain doom, Trump punched back. And he punched back hard. For ninety minutes Trump put the system on trial. He gave voice to the silent majority as he dominated both his opponent and the crooked moderators with the righteous indignation of the sovereign American people.
Trump dropped the "Secretary Clinton" act. Clearly, Conway and Ailes will be seated in the caboose of the Trump Train until it pulls into Washington DC. On his glorious Easter Sunday, Trump treated old crooked in exactly the way she ought to be treated, as a felon and an enemy of the state. Trendy Anderson Cooper wanted to get personal, so Trump took the gloves off and made it personal. After the greatest one-liner of this election which, by the way, will be remembered in American history as the defining moment of this saga, "you'd be in jail," suddenly that globalist snake wanted to slither a hasty retreat back to the issues.
So Trump pursued her on the issues; and he won every point. Every. Single. Point. On healthcare, Trump shattered billions of dollars in propaganda in less than sixty seconds with his evisceration of Obamacare. On foreign policy, Trump, somehow, made it very plain that incredibly he does know more than Obama's generals about how to fight ISIS. Hell, Trump even delivered a heartier and more sincere compliment to Crooked herself at the end! Articulately, humorously, and convincingly, Donald Trump did more for the Republican Party in ninety minutes than its leadership has done in eight long years of miserable humiliation. This was the most effective debate performance of any presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan.
Millions of deplorables and basement dwellers cheered him on as Trump delivered devastating nuclear punches, dominating that serpent into submission both physically and rhetorically. This was his night - this was our night. At long last, the truth which the media has suppressed for nearly three decades was set free in the booming tenor of our mad general before tens of millions; a fitting comeuppance for a cartel that decided to go to war with the man who wrote the book on the art of the comeback.
Last night the American people saw heart. For years we dreaded electing phony, lying politicians, faceless puppets in masks. Republican and Democrat, not one voter had any illusions that the system had been bought and paid for long before any of us were born. Last night Trump proved that there is another way. He wasn't polite, he didn't wait his turn, and he didn't mince words. We saw the resurrection of a mortal man, perhaps the greatest of us. Though he is flawed like us, through hell and back, he has fought with clenched fists and gritted teeth to save us. The silent majority will not go quietly into the night because we have Trump! Because the strength, wit, and will of one man refuses to allow this country to fold, he has asserted himself into the grand story of history through sheer striving.
Trump complained last night that the debate was three on one, he had it wrong. This election has mobilized the thousands of bureaucrats, the hundreds of billionaires, the hundreds of politicians, the dozens of mainstream media corporations, the handful of social media networks, and the US government on one man. It wouldn't be fair otherwise. Donald Trump can save the world, and last night he gave us the gift of hope. The last 3o days of this campaign will be ugly, but when the dust settles we will know our friends from our foes, the patriots from the globalists; and we will see if we were worth saving all along. Donald Trump has given us everything he's got, God bless him. Now we pray that our neighbors will do the same to make America great again.
With Hurricane Matthew set to strike the Florida coast this weekend, climate alarmism has predictably reared its ugly head once again. As with each and every catastrophic meteorological event for the past 25 years, the indigent savages of the Middle West are reminded by our cosmopolitan Manhattanite masters that bad weather is not the result of a dynamic earth but of an imperialistic reliance on evil fossil fuels. The biblical natural terrors wrought by Mother Gaia are invited by a selfish nation of greedy consumers, if only we would repent and subordinate the private to the collective good! Then we would have a bountiful harvest!
Indeed the Democrat party in the US and the broader globalist coalition in the UN have adopted a crusader's zeal in the advancement of their climate agenda. It has become uncouth and almost impolite to express even the smallest doubt in the illogic of the latest environmentalist dogma from the new cadre of climate hustlers; and this is the heart of the issue.
Whether or not human economic activity significantly impacts the global climate is irrelevant, this is a scientific question which very few specialists have the authority to deliver legitimate answers. The implicit political question of climate change must be answered through the lens of political theory. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are not campaigning to persuade the public that economic activity changes climate, this is a foregone conclusion. They are campaigning to persuade people that government is the solution to climate change.
Therefore, the scientific debate over the cause of atmospheric changes is the wrong argument to have in the political realm. Leonardo DiCaprio is an actor. Bill Nye is an engineer, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a physicist. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are political hacks. The strongest voices in the climate change camp have no legitimate claim to understand much less make sweeping claims about the nature of a field as complicated and technical as climate science. This becomes apparent when they appear on late night talk show hosts and before UN committees. Very rarely is the science of climate discussed, the dominant theme is always which policies can governments impose on their subjects if only they would surrender the sole responsibility of changing the earth's temperature.
This is the argument which the the media will not allow to pass. The state has invented the false dichotomy between the knuckle dragging simpletons who still call it global warming and the blessed sun children on the right side of history, who believe in the pagan god of climate change and necessarily sacrifice their liberties at the altar of state to combat it. There is no third way in this Orwellian narrative. The opinion of all sensible Americans is to keep an open mind in the scientific debate, listening only to climate scientists and identifying which agencies receive their money from the United Nations; then, making an informed decision on how to proceed in a manner consistent with the institutions and traditions of a free society.
Whether the climate is changing or not because I drive to school every day is beyond me; and frankly it is beyond 99% of the loudmouth liberal talking heads on TV as well. What I do know is that even if man was proven to cause climate change beyond a shadow of a doubt, the environmentalist bureaucratic regime in Washington DC would still be operating beyond its constitutional jurisdiction. The United Nations would still have no moral or legal claim to infringe on national sovereignty because IPCC models said that private economic activity was changing the temperature.
A world in which global government presides over the daily economic decisions of sovereign Americans is a world which is not worth saving. I would rather live in Waterworld so long as my natural rights were enshrined and protected by the Constitution than to toil under the contemptuous mandate of globalist technocrats. The climate change agenda has never been about the environment, the climate agenda is about control. Put this piece of garbage in this colored bin and the temperature doesn't increase. Don't use this kind of light bulb or else the ice caps will melt. American auto manufacturers must comply with unconstitutional environmental regulations or else Florida will be underwater!
What happened to the left wing's skepticism of power? When George W. Bush toppled Saddam Hussein, the left cried tyranny! Buzzwords permeated the culture. The military industrial complex is taking over, they said. Perpetual war on terror was a smokescreen for big government, they said. And what about the environmental cartel? Is there a war more perpetual and omnipresent than the state's war against the climate of the planet? It is high time that Americans in both camps wake up to a common foe in a globalist government which uses terror to demand sacrifice.
At what point does this war on climate end? The one talking point which both parties can ignorantly regurgitate about the Iraq War is that George Bush didn't have an exit plan. Tell me then, what is the exit plan on the war on climate? Or the war on poverty? Or the war on racism? Or the war on sexism? As cliche as this proposition is, we must open or eyes to the forces at work behind these moralizing crusades. Polarization has estranged us from our most important affiliation which is neither Republican or Democrat but sovereign American. So quickly do angry conservatives and liberals jump at the chance to shout down the opposing argument which both sides have heard before, without realizing that it's all just a circus.
While Sean Hannity and Alan Combs were screaming and shouting about a science which they know nothing about, the budget and jurisdiction of the EPA expanded tenfold beyond its congressional mandate; United Nations technocrats authored thousands of pages of statist schemes to restrict private economic activity in Western nations; and American manufacturing lost millions of jobs to third world countries because of environmental regulations, to the convenient profit of multinational corporations. Just what is the immediate threat to the wellbeing of the this planet? A climate disaster which supposedly lurks just around the corner as it has for half a century or the slow march of that omnipotent beast, supernational government, its tentacles invading every decision-making institution on the globe?
We must have the courage as Patrick Henry did so many years ago. To look in the face of an uncertain future which may hold global meltdown and address it through voluntary action as a free people. To shirk the impulse of expediency which tempts us all to delegate a hard choice to a power hungry pencil pusher in a far away capital. To drown out the cacophony of smug patronizing phonies on CSPAN and CNN with that uniquely American, righteous declaration of a free people, "Give me liberty, or give me death!"
The first presidential debate last week proved, not surprisingly, that this election has officially become a popularity contest. While Donald Trump attempted as best he could to defuse irrelevant personal attacks by Hillary Clinton and to fend off a hostile moderator who encouraged them, the mainstream media has already decided that this election will be framed as a choice between the madman and the insider. This narrative is not untrue; but of course this prism of personality politics distracts, much to Clinton's advantage, away from the truest and most universal narrative which has Trump's ascendancy as the climax of a civilizational shift to nationalism, this election a choice between status quo and revolution.
Of course politics has always been a nasty business, and personality is always on the table, although this year in particular it seems that most voters and even most pundits have sworn their allegiances based based solely on character. Character seemed to be the single issue which forced a contest within the Democratic primary when it had been envisioned, almost since 2008, as a bloodless coronation, a mere formality. Fox News didn't explode into warring factions in 2015 because of disagreements over policy, it was Trump's polarizing personality which split the right wing down the center.
Since character will be the deciding factor for most people voting against Trump especially, let's be clear: every single person, to a man, who does not vote for Donald Trump because of character alone, is ridiculous and a hypocrite. The latest "scandals" to rock the Trump camp are Trump's outrageous comments about women and his shadowy tax returns which have been malevolently concealed from the public's prying eyes. Hillary has reprised Lyndon Johnson's favorite argument, that it doesn't matter what you think of her opponent, he has his finger on the button, people! There is a big, fat, red button smack in the middle of the President's desk in the Oval Office that can send mankind headfirst into a nuclear holocaust if some orange lunatic gets frustrated on Twitter.
How about a little honesty? Regarding Trump's tax returns, everybody knows why he won't release them; because he probably saves a scandalous amount of money through loopholes and other accounting tricks. He probably hasn't paid taxes or paid very little for a very long time. Where exactly is the scandal? In the first place, the implicit assumption is that Trump should be giving away money; that is hardly a good business practice. Moreover, If Donald Trump is erecting great skyscrapers and golf courses and casinos, creating tens of thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in tax revenue, why is it that he should be needlessly diverting wealth from investing in the American economy and into the coffers of bureaucrats and politicians?
If I had the money to afford the lawyers and accountants to pay no taxes, I'd be right there with him; and although many are unwilling to admit it, most people would be right there with him too. Elizabeth Warren and Barack Obama have taken the absurd line that there is something patriotic about paying your "fair share" because everybody uses roads, or something like that. Given that 76% of federal tax money is spent on entitlements or endless bloodshed in the Middle East, it is a tough sell that there is something inherently virtuous about voluntarily surrendering earned cash to Lockheed Martin or the welfare office.
Moreover, Hillary Clinton and her husband have been living off of the government dole for thirty years. While Trump may not have paid any taxes since I was born, the Clinton's have been taking money in taxes for their entire adult lives. The President takes a salary of nearly half of one million dollars a year in addition to $50,000 for expenses, $100,000 for travel, and $19,000 for entertainment, which means that Slick Willy and Crooked Hillary profited some $4.5 million in the time of their "service" during the Clinton administration.
And what were they paid for exactly? What was Hillary Clinton paid for as Senator of New York or Secretary of State? We got lousy trade deals, Al Qaeda, the housing crisis, the Iran Deal, the Russian reset, anarchy in Libya, ISIS, the collapse of Iraq and Syria, military air strips in the South China Sea, and no significant legislation. Hillary does pay taxes, she pays 43%. But had she not cooked up this phony scandal, nobody would be looking up either Trump's or Hillary's tax returns, hell nobody is looking up Hillary's tax returns now. The entire issue is nothing but a desperate political diversion, it is hypocritical to pretend otherwise.
With regards to Trump's crude and inappropriate comments about women, there ought to be a sense of proportion. Given that Trump has hired more women and done more for women in real estate than any of the presidential candidates who competed this year combined, we should be willing to look past a few crass jokes from The Celebrity Apprentice.
On this issue, Republicans can admit that Trump has poor table manners sometimes; but let's remember, he's a New Yorker who was born in 1946 and he's been a private citizen in the public eye since the late 1970s, can there not be some leniency on CNN's mandatory death sentence for mildly inappropriate jokes? Is there not a statute of limitations on offensive one liners from the 1990s? Does anybody need a refresher on why Hillary Clinton's husband became the second president in American history to be impeached? Younger people won't remember what he did with his cigars...
Donald Trump may have said crude things to women; but his record of employing them and of almost universal respect for him among his female employees proves that, as Trump himself endearingly said, "he cherishes women." Bill Clinton may say nice things about women; but his record of beating, raping, sexually assaulting, and humiliating them proves that both him and his wife hate women. By the most conservatives estimates, Bill Clinton has sexually assaulted at least three women, although that number could be as high as eleven. All of this while Hillary intimidated and used the bully pulpit to silence her husband's rape accusers for decades, a stark contrast to the third wave feminist types who maintain that all victims have a right to be believed.
The millennials and liberals who snort and laugh at Trump's supposedly misogynistic worldview are either ignorant of or completely ignoring thirty years of sexual abuse by Bill Clinton and an equally sadistic over up by Hillary. That the media and these young liberals are so willing to turn a blind eye to one of the most hedonistic predators in the history of American politics goes to show the depravity and intrinsic hypocrisy of liberalism in America today.
The final and dominant line of attack which nearly every candidate has pushed from the start is that Trump is a psychotic and immature madman who will bring on a nuclear apocalypse because of an insulting tweet. While those on the Trump Train affectionately refer to their conductor as a madman, the plain and simple truth is that there was nothing ironic or silly or even incorrect in Trump's assertion that his temperament is a strength.
In this Buzzfeed culture of spineless men and limp wristed weaklings in government and Hollywood, Trump's bombast can come across as volatile or reckless. The Republican nominee in 2008 could barely move his arms and the nominee in 2012 was a mormon, Trump is a slight disruption from this tradition. My generation has been brought up with a media consisting entirely of gentle NPR-voices talking down to and patronizing them; Trump does seem nuclear compared to that. But considering that he can change his intensity at will, as evidenced by the tamer Trump who visited Mexico and the bombastic Trump who called Ted Cruz a liar, his temperament is far more controlled than Hillary Clinton's.
If liberals are worried about temperament they ought to be consider that the Democratic nominee has assaulted Secret Service members and made her own staff members cry in fits of rage. If Trump is supremely in control of his entire spectrum of emotions and moods, Hillary Clinton can barely maintain her trademark drug induced uncharismatic apathy. She has a problem with laughing controllably, coughing uncontrollably, shaking uncontrollably, collapsing uncontrollably, and sleeping uncontrollably. Liberals worried about an out of control president with the nuclear launch codes will be voting for their own worst nightmare if they can scrape her off the street.
Hillary Clinton and the entire establishment which supports her knows full well that she can't win on the issues. In the few moments of the debate when Trump was able to sound off on matters of substance and not ridiculous "Trumped up" scandals, he shined, because he eviscerated the most vulnerable status quo political order in decades. The economy is not getting better. America is not stronger than she was eight years ago. Americans don't want an open border and they don't want Syrian refugees. On these issues, Trump knocks Hillary down harder than a cool breeze and a 9/11 ceremony; but the media will do everything in their power to prevent this historical context from defining the ballot.
In this election, Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, are all one people, the American people. Democrats must understand these hypocrisies and the ridiculousness of the made up scandals, they should be just as a angry at their political machine which promised them change and gave them more of the same in a different color (Blue or black, works either way). The most important platform that Trump is running on is that he is going to bring back some common sense, and common sense that serves the American people. The amount of concentrated power in the hands of the amorphous and shadowy establishment which has supported Hillary Clinton from the beginning is surely not something which should sit well with members of either party.
If Hillary Clinton gets in the White House, she won't owe her position to the American voter, she will owe it to her monied handlers on Wall Street and K Street. You may be with her, but she's with them. Liberals ought to exercise their open minds which they never tire of gloating about and consider just which of these two personalities is the lesser of two evils. Whether or not they choose Trump, he's still with us. Will Hillary be with the deplorables and basement dwellers? Words matter, my friends.