09/25/17

NFL players who #TakeTheKnee should talk to the wounded warriors who no longer can

By: Daniel John Sobieski | Doug Ross @ Journal

Whenever I hear about NFL players taking a knee during the national anthem, I am reminded of the double amputees that have returned from America’s wars. And the fact that while, because of our Armed Services’ sacrifice over centuries, we are entitled to speak freely, but none of us are entitled to do so in a particular forum.

NFL players are employees of a larger organization, just like Curt Schilling was when ESPN fired him for what he thought was protected speech. The speech is protected. Your access to a particular forum is not. They are teammates in a sport that pays these allegedly oppressed spoiled brats millions. Their teammates may share a different view, so does the locker room become a game prep area or a debating society? Does the field remain a porting arena or a campaign rally? Those who take a knee were indeed given that right by many who no longer have knees and are privileged to take a knee in a sport paid for by millions of fans who may disagree with them and who paid to see a game, not a protest. Players who take a knee think they are being patriotic, when they are merely being elf-indulgent and selfish. Go rent out a stadium and invite people to pay just to see you take a knee and see if anybody shows up. The response by the MFL Players Association is disingenuous, at best:

The NFL Players Association, the labor union representing the players, responded to Trump in a statement on Saturday. Here’s an excerpt of the statement:

“The peaceful demonstrations by some of our players have generated a wide array of responses. Those opinions are protected speech and a freedom that has been paid for by the sacrifice of men and women throughout history. This expression of speech has generated thoughtful discussions in our locker rooms and in board rooms. However, the line that marks the balance between the rights of every citizen in our great country gets crossed when someone is told to just ‘shut up and play.'”

Well, shut and play. That’s what people pay you handsomely to do, isn’t it? Although they are getting fewer as NFL ratings drop and outlets like ESPN lose viewers. Why not rename the teams and align ideologically. Tune in Sunday and watch Black Lives Matter line up against Blue Lives Matter? That is why ratings for the Emmys and the Oscars are tanking as people grow weary of working hard to see movies and games only to see self-absorbed and self-righteous millionaires preach to them.

Exercising the freedoms of speech and press that so many have given their last measure of devotion for, Chicago Tribune contributor Diana Goetsch recently penned an op-ed defending disgraced and unemployed former NFL quarterback Colin  Kaepernick and his infamous taking the knee during the national anthem. Not stopping there, Goetsch goes on to slam the national anthem as a “pompous battle number” that wasn’t played before sporting events until 1942 in the dark days of World War II.

One wonders if the likes of Kaepernick and Goetsch have pondered the possibility that were it not for the sacrifice of veterans during World War II she just might be plying her trade writing her tirades in Japanese or German. Were it not for the fact that the flag  the national anthem celebrates was raised at Iwo Jima and never stopped flying at Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge.  .

Let us make the obligatory stipulation that  the likes of Kaepernick and Goetsch have the right to express their opinions through their actions and words. But not in a forum paid for by others in both blood and treasure. Men, and women, have died or been maimed for life for their right to be obnoxious and insensitive to the heroic sacrifice of others. AsAaron Bandler writes at the Daily Wire:

“Unlike the magisterial ‘America the Beautiful,’ ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ is a pompous battle number,” wrote Goetsch. “Spurred by a petition bearing 5 million veterans’ signatures, Congress designated it the national anthem in 1931, but it wasn’t until 1942, and our entry into World War II, that it was played on loudspeakers daily before games.”…

Just as Kaepernick has a First Amendment right to protest the national anthem, NFL teams have the First Amendment right to choose not to sign him if they feel like his prior actions will negatively impact their product. That’s how a free market works, whether Goetsch likes it or not.

But most importantly, for Goetsch to refer to the anthem as “a pompous battle number” isn’t just appalling, it’s historically inaccurate. Francis Scott Key penned the anthem after witnessing the American flag prevail over Fort McHenry during the War of 1812 when it initially seemed to him as if Britain was going to win the battle.

That’s what our national anthem is all about: even during the country’s darkest moments, America, the beacon of hope and freedom, finds a way to prevail in the end. That’s why everyone stands for the national anthem before sporting events; it’s a reminder that we are lucky to have the freedom to be able to attend such an event and we should honor those who died to preserve that freedom for us.

Goetsch is free to claim Kaepernick lost his job for political or even marketing reasons, although his performance on the field was less than Hall of Fame stuff. The 49ers or any other team are free to hire or fire him for any reason. In a free country, that’s called the free market.

Liberals tend to be selective in defending free speech. Protests against the flag or the national anthem are to be praised, but public affirmation of faith and traditional values are to be mocked, such as fromer Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow’s slightly different taking of the knee and giving of thanx to the Creator from which all our inalienable rights come.. As Investor’s Business Daily editorialized in 2012:

Even before George Washington is said to have taken a knee in prayer at Valley Forge, men and women of faith and courage endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights have guided this nation to greatness.

Some 45 million people watched Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow complete that 80-yard touchdown pass play to Demaryius Thomas on the first play from scrimmage in overtime to lead his team over the Pittsburgh Steelers in Sunday’s wild card playoff game.

They also saw him take a knee and give thanks to the God he believes in, an act that’s been dubbed “Tebow-ing.”…

On the postgame show, CBS analysts “Tebow-ed” in unison, mocking the seriousness of Tebow’s intent. “Saturday Night Live” has done a skit in which Jesus appears in the Bronco locker room. God does not take sides in football games, Tebow’s critics say.

Tebow would agree with that, but he also acknowledges a higher power’s influence on his life, win or lose, just as the Founding Fathers did when they acknowledged in the Declaration of Independence that we were “endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights,” rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of, not from, religion.

On April 25, 1976, back when it was not politically incorrect to be a public patriot, Chicago Cub outfielder Rick Monday made what some call the greatest play ever on a baseball field, a play honored 40 years later at a Dodger game in Chavez Ravine:

Rick Monday was honored by throwing out the first pitch at Monday’s game at Chavez Ravine for arguably the greatest save in Dodgers Stadium history.

What, you say, Monday was an outfielder? And why would he be credited with a save?

Forty years ago on April 25, Monday was playing centerfield for the Cubs in a game against the Dodgers.

The game turned from an ordinary early season game into one with high drama when two people suddenly appeared in the outfield at Dodger Stadium.

Legendary Dodgers announcer Vin Scully said, “”It looks like he’s going to burn a flag!”

One had an American flag. The other, lighter fluid and was planning on burning Old Glory. This was an act Monday, who served in the Marine Corps, was not about to let happen.

Monday raced across the field to grab the flag before it could be burned in protest. Via MLB.com from a story on the 30th anniversary of Monday’s swift action, Monday describes the moment in his own words:

When these two guys ran on the field, something wasn’t right. And it wasn’t right from the standpoint that one of them had something cradled under his arm. It turned out to be an American flag. They came from the left-field corner, went past Cardenal to shallow left-center field.

“That’s when I saw the flag. They unfurled it as if it was a picnic blanket. They knelt beside it, not to pay homage but to harm it as one of the guys was pulling out of his pocket somewhere a big can of lighter fluid. He began to douse it.

“What they were doing was wrong then, in 1976. In my mind, it’s wrong now, in 2006. It’s the way I was raised. My thoughts were reinforced with my six years in the Marine Corp Reserves. It was also reinforced by a lot of friends who lost their lives protecting the rights and freedoms that flag represented.

Diana Goetsch and her ilk are free to exercise their freedoms but they are not free to forget where those freedoms came from and who fought and died for them. She’s a grand old flag. Let’s honor her and what the flag represents every chance we get.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell whines that President Trump’s rematks about respecting the flag and the national anthem are disrespectful of NFL players:

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Saturday that President Trump’s recent comments about players kneeling during the national anthem are “divisive” and show a “lack of respect” for the pro football league and its players.

“The NFL and our players are at our best when we help create a sense of unity in our country and our culture,” he said in a statement. “Divisive comments like these demonstrate an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL, our great game and all of our players, and a failure to understand the overwhelming force for good our clubs and players represent in our communities.”

Millionaires taking a knee during the national anthem to protest alleged social injustice does build unity and is not a force for good. It breeds disunity and divisiveness. Look up in the stands, players, and see the diversity and equality of those, including veterans, who came to see you. Shut up and play.

Those who would take a knee to protest the American flag likely have never been handed a folded one. NFL players who want to take a knee should talk to the wounded warriors who no longer can.  

09/22/17

Obama’s Revolution and the Drugging of America

By: Cliff Kincaid | America’s Survival

Working with the George Soros-funded marijuana movement, a group called the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) is demanding acceptance of “psychedelics,” or mind-altering drugs that create hallucinations, to be accepted as “legal prescription drugs.” Powerful and wealthy supporters of Barack Obama such as Joby Pritzker of the billionaire Pritzker family are among the noted backers of MAPS. Researcher and citizen activist Dr. Tina Trent discusses the need to stop this dangerous and evil movement.

09/22/17

Welcome To A New Era

By: Kent Engelke | Capitol Securities

I do not think it is a stretch to write that the markets have officially entered into a new era. QE is now replaced with QT. QE lasted about six years and QT is expected to last for five years. How will all markets respond?

Perhaps the only accurate statement to write is that we don’t know. The pontifications will be great, but only history will dictate the outcome. The Fed’s balance sheet is at a record size and such a feat has never been attempted. Mistakes or missteps will happen. It is not a question as to if, but rather as to when.

As noted many times, the vast majority of bulge bracket firms have made bearish pronouncements before Wednesday’s anticipated announcement with Vanguard yesterday reiterating their heightened concern.

A primary component of all valuation models is corporate cash flow discounted by some interest rates. The higher the interest rate, the lower the valuation if everything else remains the same.

It is now widely known there is a great disparity between value and growth. For this discussion, I will define value as energy and the financials and growth as the technologies. Some benchmarks suggest the disparity between the two is as much as 40%, the greatest difference in almost a generation.

Hypothetically speaking, value should outperform in a moderate rising rate environment. Will there be a prolonged period of value out-performance comparable to the prolonged period of growth out-performance, ending only when all declared growth investing is dead just as many have today declared value as dead?

Yesterday, value outperformed closing nominally higher. Growth was down about 0.50%. Is this a harbinger of things to come?

Last night the foreign markets were mixed. London was up 0.17%, Paris was up 0.39% and Frankfurt was up 0.24%. China was down 0.16%, Japan was down 0.25% and Hang Sang was down 0.82%.

The Dow should open nervously lower. The 10-year is up 5/32 to yield 2.25%.

09/21/17

Young Democrats Caught Red-Handed Inciting Anti-Police Riots In St. Louis

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

I wish I could say I was shocked by this, but sadly I’m not. It turns out that the St. Louis Young Democrats are collaborating with Black Lives Matter to instigate protests and riots in the city. At approximately noon yesterday, the Young Democrats tweeted that the next “protest” in response to the not-guilty verdict in the Jason Stockley trial was planned for Wednesday evening. They told rioters where and when to show up. They hashtagged it #blacklivesmatter on the tweet.

Of course, both groups are claiming that they are calling for peaceful protests. Funny how it never works out that way though. Black Lives Matter is a domestic terror group and they aren’t very concerned with staying peaceful. They are much better known for smashing storefronts, setting cars on fire, spraying chemicals, throwing rocks and projectiles at police and beating people up. We’ve had six nights of violence in St. Louis. A dozen police officers have been injured and thousands of dollars of damage has been committed against local businesses. Now, we find out that the Young Democrats are in the thick of it, which isn’t surprising since they are communists.

All of these thugs are protesting the shooting death of Anthony Lamar Smith by Officer Jason Stockley. Smith had been convicted of dealing drugs and was on parole. Smith was involved in a high-speed chase with Stockley in 2011. Heroin was found in Smith’s car. Stockley wound up shooting Smith in the altercation. The officer was acquitted of murder charges on September 15th and here we are. If you are known by the company you keep, then the Young Democrats are radical, violent, militant activists who want to get their violence on with cops.

The mayor has also been justifying the violence in her public statements. That only invites more of this. Democrat Mayor Lyda Krewson was elected to her first term in April. Before that she served on the St. Louis City Council for 20 years. You remember Krewson… she sat in her car drinking coffee as they took down Confederate statues in the dark of night. As a councilwoman, she championed laws banning concealed carry of handguns and smoking in the city.

The Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson had this to say about Krewson, “Instead of encouraging the police to arrest these people and put them under the jailhouse, she is justifying the anger and destruction these people are causing and to think these protesters are destroying people’s property over a drug dealer, who was out on parole and was caught trying to sell drugs and had rammed his vehicle into police and he ended up dead. So instead of telling the black community that this is not what you want your children to grow up and be like, they are encouraging more of the same thuggish behavior,” Peterson said. “This is vile, and it’s out of control. There is another agenda going on, and it’s not about black lives.” He’s got that right. It’s about tearing it all down and causing mayhem and chaos in the streets of America. It’s what communists do.

Krewson had her home spray painted and a window smashed by a brick thrown by these thugs. Yet, she defends them more than the police or the people of St. Louis. It turns out that the Young Democrats have been working with Black Lives Matter on these riots since the first night they happened. Last night, the organization tweeted that a scheduled town-hall meeting by Mayor Krewson had been canceled because, as the mayor stated, the town halls “are happening in the streets. We are listening.” She’s listening to the wrong side here. Typical Marxist.

In fact, the mayor issued a two-page statement where she said that while violence will not be tolerated, she is “listening” to the protesters and their demands. Hey mayor… can you hear them now? Wait until they set the city on fire, maybe then she’ll really listen. She sees the problem as being not just the Stockley case or the police themselves, but years of what she is calling “institutional racism.” The “root cause” of the city’s racial angst is “a legacy of policies that disproportionately impact people along racial and economic lines. … This is institutional racism,” she said. Spare us… she knows that is bull feces. She says that St. Louis has a chance to ‘lead the way’ in providing more equitable police service. She’s going to lead them alright… right off a cliff. And St. Louis is already leading the nation in riots and unrest. Great job mayor!

She finally ended off by stating that her administration is providing more equitable police service. It looks to me as if the good mayor is condemning violence on one hand and condoning it with the other. She’s feckless and weak. She has no business being mayor. This has to do with a void of moral character more than institutional racism. And the mayor is fomenting the situation. It seems to me the racists are Black Lives Matter and the Young Democrats, not their victims and not the police. No one is confronting the evil in the streets of St. Louis. That’s what needs to happen here and in cities across the US. If America wants to survive that is. And we need to call these people out as militant racists and communists. If you can’t name the enemy, you can’t fight them, much less defeat them.

09/21/17

Will The Two Year Treasury Yield 2.75% By December 2018?

By: Kent Engelke | Capitol Securities

The S & P is stuck in one of the tightest trading ranges in history as all attention is now on the endless commentary on reducing the Fed’s balance sheet. Oil is almost at $51 barrel, the highest level in about five months as OPEC is in 116% of compliance of production cuts. Inventories are declining faster than expected as demand is accelerating because of greater than anticipated global growth.

Speaking of the Fed, the Committee’s forecast calls for inflation to remain under 2% for the next 12 months. I ask if oil rises to $55-$60 barrel, will the Fed maintain this forecast? The FOMC intends to increase rates one more time in 2017 and three times in 2018.

If the Committee takes this path, the overnight rate will be yielding more than the yield on today’s 10-year Treasury and close to the current 30-year Treasury yield.

The FOMC also announced its intentions to begin reducing the size of its balance sheet next month in a gradual but consistent manner. What will QT be met?

As noted many times, the consistency from 2010-2015 that was projected for Fed policy did not unfold. In January, I opined about the odds of expected Fed policy again not materializing, defined this time as greater than expected rates because of stronger than anticipated growth.

Yesterday, it was reiterated for the first time since 2007 that all 45 OECD countries — the 45 largest countries in the world — are expecting their economies to expand in 2017, an expansion lasting into 2018. This is a rarity. Such contiguous expansions last occurred in 2007. Before that was in the late 1980s and before that was 1973.

Equities were mixed on the news. Treasuries were essentially unchanged.

Last night the foreign markets were mixed. London was flat, Paris was up 0.51% and Frankfurt was up 0.33%. China was down 0.24%, Japan was up 0.18% and Hang Sang was down 0.16%.

The Dow should open nervously lower as many are questioning the valuations of the market leaders in a potentially higher rate environment and the impact of QT. The 10-year is off 2/32 to yield 2.28%.

09/20/17

Can You Hear This? Castro’s Intelligence Operation Inside the United States

By: Denise Simon | Political Vanguard

The Castro brothers of Cuba have been running spy operations inside the United States for decades and only a few have been detected and caught. The FBI has a division devoted to tips, clues and investigations for tracking the evidence and bringing prosecutions. It is tedious work, after all, it is a clandestine craft on both sides.

Cuba has a revenue base of selling intelligence and the global buyers include Iran, Russia, China and even Syria.

In 1998, a group of ten Cuban spies were arrested.

Ten people were charged in the largest Cuban spy ring ever uncovered in the United States since Fidel Castro came to power nearly 40 years ago.

According to the FBI, the spy ring had been under surveillance in south Florida for three years.

The eight men and two women tried to penetrate U.S. military bases, infiltrate anti-Castro groups and manipulate U.S. media and political groups, federal investigators said Monday. One suspect was a civilian employee at the U.S. Naval Air Station in Key West, Fla.

Ana Montes was arrested in 2001 spying for Cuba. She held a key position at the Defense Intelligence Agency where she had access to the most sensitive information within government. Montes shared information with Cuba for an estimated 16 years. Montes was so valuable that she was included in a proposed spy and people swap deal under the Obama administration.

In the successful effort by President Barack Obama to normalize relations with Cuba, a huge swap did happen, where Cuba received all the benefits.

In 2009, yet another Cuban operative case was discovered and investigated at the U.S. State Department, where again very sensitive, classified and top secret information was provided to Cuba.

An indictment and criminal complaint unsealed today in the District of Columbia charges Walter Kendall Myers, 72, a.k.a. “Agent 202,” his wife, Gwendolyn Steingraber Myers, 71, a.k.a. “Agent 123” and “Agent E-634,” with conspiracy to act as illegal agents of the Cuban government and to communicate classified information to the Cuban government. Each of the defendants is also charged with acting as an illegal agent of the Cuban government and with wire fraud.

Kendall Myers was known as Fidel Castro’s personal spy and Hillary Clinton ordered a damage assessment to take place to determine the extent of the damage. Such a report was not forthcoming.

Cuba has deployed the same information tactics as other adversarial government’s intelligence operations and that is to place recruiters and operatives in academia. As higher education employs leftist professors and the syllabus has grown more anti-West, sympathizing more with Marxism and Socialism, campuses across America are ripe incubation centers.

All this brings more of a challenge to the Trump administration and to Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, with the 15-month health scandal in Havana known as some kind of sonic weapon that has resulted in hearing loss and traumatic brain injury for U.S. diplomatic staff on duty in Cuba. Tillerson is considering closing the U.S. embassy in Cuba which is long past due.

Between the corruption, the spying and the health risk to an estimated 21 U.S. personnel, what is the Trump administration waiting for to order operations in Cuba shuttered?

The U.S. said in August it had expelled two Cuban diplomats from the country’s embassy in Washington, D.C., after it revealed details of the suspected attack. Donald Trump’s administration said it had taken the measure in response to Cuba’s failure to protect the U.S. officials under the Vienna Convention.

U.S. officials told the Associated Press last week that the incidents had focused with “laser-like specificity” on rooms or even parts of rooms in houses and a hotel where U.S. staffers were present.

“None of this has a reasonable explanation,” Fulton Armstrong, a former CIA official who served in Havana before America reopened an embassy there in 2015, told the AP. “It’s just mystery after mystery after mystery.”

The FBI, Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Cuban authorities have launched investigations into the attacks.

A group of five Republican senators have written to Tillerson, requesting that the U.S. again shutter its Havana embassy, which Barack Obama opened toward the end of his presidency.

One can only wonder if President Trump will do so.

09/20/17

Let’s Be Honest: Trump’s U.N. Speech Was a Disaster

By: Cliff Kincaid

President Trump in his U.N. speech failed to mention that Russia and China are responsible for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. What’s worse, Trump actually thanked Russia and China for helping to somehow restrain North Korea through the ineffective United Nations.

The “America First” president said, “The United Nations Security Council recently held two unanimous 15-0 votes adopting hard-hitting resolutions against North Korea, and I want to thank China and Russia for joining the vote to impose sanctions, along with all of the other members of the Security Council.  Thank you to all involved.”

Trump should have denounced China and Russia for making a nuclear North Korea possible. Then, he should have announced a U.S. withdrawal from “The House That Hiss Built.”

Peter Vincent Pry, the chief of staff of the congressional EMP Commission who served in the CIA, points out, “There are many examples of technology transfers from Russia and China to North Korea, proving they have helped accelerate Pyongyang’s nuclear missile programs. North Korea’s nuclear missile threat is built upon Russian and Chinese technology.”

So Trump is thanking the Russians and Chinese for making North Korea into a nuclear weapons threat and bringing the world to the point of a nuclear exchange.

Hard-hitting resolutions? It’s bad enough that we stayed in the U.N. after we found out that its founder and first acting Secretary-General Alger Hiss was a Soviet agent and spy. Now this organization Trump says was founded on “noble aims” has brought the world to the point of war.  In this case, the stakes involve the lives of tens of millions of Americans and South Koreans.

Conservatives are apparently so used to seeing American interests sold out by politicians like Barack Hussein Obama that they greeted Trump’s “tough” speech at the U.N. In fact, he was notoriously soft on Russia and China.

It was entertaining for Trump to talk about the failures of socialism and communism, except for the fact that China has perfected a system of Communist Party control and expansion financed by Western capitalism. The result is an emerging communist superpower that is driving an alliance of anti-American countries known as BRICS and pursuing its own global trade apparatus, the Belt and Road development initiative, financed by a world currency other than the dollar.

By the way, the current U.N. Secrerary-General, António Guterres, is a former head of the Socialist International. And yet Trump bashed socialism while congratulating him for leading the fight for “U.N. reform?” Does Trump really believe this? Does he expect us to believe this?

Continuing to waste tens of billions of mostly American dollars on the U.N. in the name of “reform” is one thing. Setting the stage for the mass murder of millions of Americans by pretending the U.N. will do something about it is something else.

Pry notes, “The latest evidence North Korea’s nuclear missile program is being helped by Russia and China is their successful H-bomb test on Sept. 2…The demonstrated yield of North Korea’s H-bomb is reportedly estimated by the U.S. intelligence community to be 120 kilotons (160 kilotons according to Japan), or about 12-16 times more powerful than the Hiroshima A-bomb, comparable in power to two-stage H-bombs of the United States.”

He adds,“Unfortunately, North Korea’s own description of its nuclear missile capabilities has consistently been more reliable than U.S. intelligence community estimates. These estimates have wrongly assumed North Korea is working on its own, without help from China and Russia.”

So the situation is probably worse than what we are being told. How many intelligence failures do we suffer to suffer through as a nation before we conclude that the incompetence constitutes treason?

The ultimate objective of the communist-Muslim alliance, as we explain in our book The Sword of Revolution, is the destruction of the United States and Israel. In the meantime, they aim to neutralize South Korea as a U.S. ally and integrate the free nation into one Korea under communist domination. That has been their objective all along. They tried it militarily. Now they’re going to do it diplomatically.

Trump said, “It is time for North Korea to realize that the denuclearization is its only acceptable future.” The time is past. A real “America First” policy, as noted by Pry, is that “We cannot live with a nuclear-armed North Korea because someday the evil regime in Pyongyang will fall, and they will want to drag us with them, down into darkness. We must strike and disarm North Korea of at least those few nuclear assets that can threaten U.S. cities, before it is too late.”

The alternative offered by Trump is to remain under the threat of nuclear blackmail from Communist North Korea and its backers and then retaliate once millions of Americans are dead. That is the threat we are now under. And we have Russia, China, and the Obama Administration to “thank” for that dire predicament.

Based on what we heard from Trump at the U.N., Pry’s advice will not be taken.

The “denuclearization” may indeed take place but under a plan devised by Communist China and Russia and supported by the same Deep State operatives who allowed North Korea to go nuclear.

The plan was all laid out in Selig S. Harrison’s book, Korean Endgame: A Strategy for Reunification and U.S. Disengagement.

The last word in that title, “disengagement,” is the key. The U.S. will disengage, leaving the North Korean regime in place and South Korea at the mercy of North Korea’s backers. The book, published in 2002, asked, “Should the U.S. get out of Korea once and for all?”  It’s taken a while but the answer is upon us.

When an “America First” President like Trump thanks Russia and China and the U.N. for a disaster in the making on the Korean peninsula, you know we are in deep trouble.

Japan will be the next U.S. ally to be abandoned. It will have to rearm, and quickly.

Over in the Middle East, Israel will have to consider the consequences. Trump talks tough about Iran, too, but the Iranian nuclear deal is still in effect.

The difference between South Korea and Israel is that Israel has nuclear weapons. That’s a big difference. It could make all the difference in the world – for Israel’s survival.

As for the United States, honest U.S. military leaders are seeing a “multi-polar” world and “multi-domain” threats emerge from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and others. We may be too weak to save ourselves. Meanwhile, Trump’s military advisers are sending thousands of more U.S. troops into the no-win war in Afghanistan, where Russia is arming the Taliban killing our soldiers.

Yet Trump thanks Russia for voting for another resolution on North Korea, only the latest in a series of ineffective statements from the world body.

Trump’s first National Security Advisor, retired Lt. General Michael T. Flynn, recognized the dangers. He talked about an “enemy alliance” against America. He wanted to clean out the traitors from the Intelligence Community. That’s why Flynn was forced to resign, after a Deep State leak, and he is facing mounting legal bills in response to Russia-gate Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller’s “investigation.” It’s a probe that ultimately targets Trump himself.

Trump’s supporters have to be honest. “America First” sounds good but it only masks our sharp decline. His U.N. speech excited some members of his base anxious for red meat but in fact symbolizes an attempt at a truce with the Deep State, in the hope that he will be permitted to serve out his term.

We are  entering a period of history in which we can only hope and pray that a communist madman will not oblitate our fellow citizens in a massive nuclear strike. Our own lives now hang in the balance while Trump tries to save his own skin.

God bless America indeed.

09/20/17

Mainstream Political Polls Commit Fraud

By: James Simpson | Bomb Throwers

The credibility of mainstream political polls took a serious hit following the 2016 election. Most predicted an easy victory for Hillary Clinton. The entire political class believed she was a shoo-in, and that the election would be a mere formality. But the polls and the pundits were wrong, glaringly so.

It appears they are wrong again, because they persist in making the same mistakes they have been making for years.

Most pollsters and pundits report that President Trump’s approval ratings are in the tank — consistently in the mid- to upper-30 percent range. His disapproval rates average a whopping 57 percent, according to the polls cited below.

The following table reveals why.

In every poll, Democrat respondents outnumbered Republicans by significant amounts. The Economist poll was the worst. Only 24 percent of respondents (360) were Republicans compared to 38 percent (570) Democrats – which means that 58 percent more Democrats were polled than Republicans, as shown in the %D/R column. On average, in these seven widely recognized national polls, only 29 percent (409 people) of the total 1,383 polled were Republicans, while 37 percent (518) were Democrats. Another way of saying it is that, on average, 29 percent more Democrats than Republicans were polled.

This occurs because of the way these polls are constructed. Most use a methodology that queries a random sample of adults. That sounds “fair” and one would expect it to produce roughly equivalent numbers of Republicans and Democrats, but it does not.

All of these polls were taken in August except Gallup, which does not make public the political party composition of its polling samples. Gallup’s May poll — a three-day moving average — was listed instead because Gallup provided political party breakdown. Its latest poll, however, puts Trump’s approval/disapproval rate at 38 percent/56 percent, which isn’t much different from the May poll cited.

Gallup was contacted twice to provide demographic information for its latest poll, but refused to do so. One must question why one of the most widely quoted polling organizations does not allow people to easily discover the political party breakdown of poll respondents.

According to pollster John McLaughlin of McLaughlin Associates, using random samples of adults without further stratification tends to include more young people and females — both groups more likely to be Democrats. Because it is random, it may even include non-citizens. Using this survey methodology, Independents are more likely to poll like Democrats. By using the random sample method, pollsters know they will get a disproportionate number of Democrats and/or people who respond like Democrats, but since few people delve into the weeds to examine polling demographics, the polls are taken to be legitimate.

This is also the least expensive way to poll, providing another reason why so many polls skew the results to the left — independent of any deliberate bias.

Quoted in an article by the Daily Caller, Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica, an independent polling organization, said:

I do know inherently there is a Democratic bias in the polls. And most [pollsters] will deny it… Typically, the mainstream media and the major polling companies will never admit their bias to you. This is like an alcoholic not admitting to using alcohol. They are in denial.

Quoted in the same article, independent pollster John Zogby said, “I am a liberal Democrat, but I always felt that other polls over-sampled Democrats and under-sampled Republicans.”

A few polls query registered voters, which may eliminate non-citizens and improve the results somewhat. The Politico poll, for example, queries registered voters. It shows only a 4 percentage point spread between Republicans and Democrats and provides one of the highest Trump approval ratings of all polls listed in the table.

But this is not always a reliable measure, either. For example, the Economist poll claims to query “registered voters,” however, voter registration is not verified by directly questioning poll respondents. It is calculated using Census Bureau estimates of the overall registered voter population. So the veracity of the “registered voters” figure is questionable in this poll. Only 24 percent of respondents were Republicans, while 38 percent were Democrats.

Using registered voters is not the best measure, either, because many registered voters never actually vote. McLaughlin says that polling likely voters, while more expensive and time consuming, produces more accurate and representative poll numbers. Voter turnout in the last four elections averaged 32 percent Republican and 34 percent Democrat.

McLaughlin told me that any poll that departs significantly from those averages will bias the results.

As McLaughlin explains:

For example, in our recently completed national poll, Republicans approve the job the President is doing 90% to 8% disapprove. In contrast among Democrats only 17% approve of the President while 80% disapprove. So for each point you take away from a poll’s Republican affiliation, you’re taking a point away from the President’s job approval. Conversely, when you add five points more Democrats, you’re adding four points to the President’s disapproval. It’s that simple.

McLaughlin Associates uses likely voters, as does Rasmussen. Using this method, Trump’s approval ratings are significantly better, currently averaging 46 percent, while the disapproval rate is lower. Similarly, the breakdown of Republicans versus Democrats reflects how people would likely vote if an election were held today, as opposed to a random sample or even a sample of registered voters.

The left-wing bias embedded in most national polls also skews poll responses on virtually all partisan issues, giving an inaccurate reading of public sentiment on everything from taxes to school choice, from immigration to national defense.

McLaughlin says:

Not only does it affect [Trump’s] job rating and favorable rating, it also affects the policies and issues these polls purport to measure. Maybe this is why so many Republicans, Independents and Trump voters seem to disregard media polls. It appears the media is once again sacrificing its credibility for its liberal, anti-Trump bias.

The McLaughlin poll had many other results that should get Congress, and congressional leadership in particular, to sit up and take notice:

  • Only 21 percent believe congressional leadership is helping “drain the swamp.” Forty-nine percent said that congressional leadership supports the swamp.
  • Sixty-three percent believe House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should be replaced.
  • Only 15 percent said they would support the reelection of Speaker Ryan and Majority Leader McConnell.
  • A majority of those who support Ryan and McConnell are Democrats.
  • More people (21 percent) support Antifa street thugs than Ryan and McConnell.
  • Forty-six percent are more likely to vote for their member of Congress if they support Trump’s immigrant vetting policies; 38 percent are more likely to vote for them if they don’t.
  • Fifty-two percent are more likely to vote for their member of Congress if the lawmaker supports Trump’s ban on transgenders in the military: 28 percent are less likely to vote for their member if the lawmaker supports transgenders in the military.
  • Fifty-six percent of voters favor repealing and replacing Obamacare; 39 percent oppose.
  • Fifty percent are less likely to vote for their member of Congress if the lawmaker refuses to repeal Obamacare mandates and taxes, while 36 percent are more likely to vote for their lawmaker.
  • Fifty-three percent of voters favor less government; only 32 percent want more.Congress recently held a hearing on curtailing free speech. The McLaughlin poll reveals that:
  • Eighty-five percent believe freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Only 9 percent believe it should be restricted when offensive.
  • Despite the fallout from Charlottesville, Virginia, 85 percent believe the Constitution supports the rights of everyone to freedom of speech, no matter how offensive. Only 8 percent believe it should be restricted.
  • Sixty-three percent oppose Antifa efforts to silence people they disagree with.
  • Forty-three percent oppose Internet companies using the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) “hate list.” This blacklist names many mainstream conservative groups the SPLC disagrees with politically.
  • Only 32 percent supported using the SPLC’s list.

This poll suggests that many more voters support conservative ideas and policies than mainstream media polls claim. Congress should take a very close look at this poll, because it is a much better indication of those policies and candidates a majority is likely to support.

James Simpson is an economist, businessman and investigative journalist. His latest book is The Red Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America. Follow Jim on Twitter & Facebook.

09/19/17

Democrat Marxist Congressmen Arrested Outside Trump Tower For Protesting DACA [VIDEO]

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Reps. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) were arrested today sitting in the street outside of Trump Tower in Manhattan. Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) was also taken into custody. All three are die-hard Marxists and as racist as they come. They were busted for civil disobedience.

Why would communist Democratic Congressmen make fools of themselves like this? Because of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals that was brought into being unconstitutionally by Barack Obama. Which is just hysterical because as far as I can tell and as much as I hate to say it, it looks like President Trump is in favor of cementing DACA. He discontinued it with a six-month rider, telling Congress to fix it, not do away with it. Unless of course, they are demanding all 11 million illegal aliens get to stay and are granted Amnesty. That’s what the Democrats really want. That and chain migration.

A number of members of Congress were present for the protest. As I understand it, others were arrested as well. Police also arrested New York City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito. A spokesman for Gutierrez’ office confirmed his arrest. Grijalva’s would not return comment on the matter. This protest comes as President Trump was addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations. He was warning them about the threat of North Korea and that the US would take them out if we have to. I hope that is true.

The rally was promoted as being by “immigrants rights activists” and members of Congress. In other words, Mexican nationalists, radical revolutionaries and communists. Gutierrez made a statement: “We’re taking the necessary steps to make it clear to President Trump, the Republicans and the Democrats that we will continue this peaceful fight for DREAMers and immigrants as long as it takes to enact legislation and put DREAMers in a safe place. A few congressmen and elected-officials gathering in front of Trump Tower doesn’t mean much if it is not backed up by the grassroots and allies and today we are standing with diverse allies to make sure Congress and the President do more than just talk about solutions, they actually follow through with action.”

“We are here to defend our immigrant communities,” Mark-Viverito said before they were arrested. She was then put in plastic handcuffs and loaded into a Department of Correction bus with other protesters. “We don’t want families to be divided,” she said. “Trump’s policy goes against what the majority of this nation supports and believes in. It goes against our values.”

Advocacy groups including United for Fair Housing, Make the Road New York, New York Communities for Change, Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM) and Make the Road New Jersey were in attendance at the rally as well. It was well-organized. Aren’t they all? However, only ten people sat down in front of Trump Tower. All were arrested… all were Democrats. Four of them were well known politicians. They called on Congress to pass the DREAM Act — which would offer legal status to people brought to the United States illegally as children — without the added border security expected to be included in a deal between Trump and Congressional Democrats.

“They deserve to stay in America. They are workers, students, soldiers in our armed forces,” Espaillat said. Democrats get arrested rather frequently for publicity. It’s the communist way. Bill de Blasio did it while running for mayor in New York to protest the closure of Long Island College Hospital, which ended up closing after he took office. Natalia Aristizabal of the group Make the Road New York said Congress should not offer the extra cash for border security that Democratic leaders have agreed to in exchange for shielding the young immigrants. “We do not want enforcement. We do not want to put the broader immigrant community in jeopardy,” she said. In other words, screw the rule of law.

“Since you have refused to leave the roadway, you will be placed under arrest on the charge of disorderly conduct,” said an NYPD loudspeaker announcement before the group was arrested. Grijalva said “all acts of pressure are appropriate right now” in defense of the thousands of immigrants, commonly referred to as DREAMers. That’s a call for violence in the streets by the way. It’s a rallying cry for revolution.

09/19/17

Would you say that again?

By: T F Stern | Self-Educated American

In recent news the State of Oregon is leading the way down yet another slippery slope, this time with free abortions on demand for anyone, including illegal aliens.  It’s been presented as a ‘women’s health issue’; but therein lies the deception, and that deception has been successful as it alters the discussion and removes any consideration for constitutional rights of the individual being aborted.

An article written by Christina Cauterucci praised the ambitious legislative package.

“On Wednesday, the Oregon state legislature joined the ranks of states preparing for the worst by passing the Reproductive Health Equity Act. If signed by the very pro-woman Gov. Kate Brown, the bill will enshrine the right to abortion care in state law, a first for Oregon. It also requires insurers in the state to cover contraception, vasectomies, prenatal and postpartum care, abortion care, screenings for reproductive cancers and STIs, and counseling for survivors of domestic violence. All would be completely covered at no cost to patients, even if the ACA were repealed, with some federally mandated exceptions for churches and religious groups.”

Let’s dissect that statement and attempt to understand the mindset of those who have jumped on board the Reproductive Health Equity Act; one passed while ‘preparing for the worst’.

What is the worst?  Is it the idea that individuals might be held accountable for their actions both morally and financially?  Morality shouldn’t be an issue; we got rid of that years ago…

Some argue that rape victims who get pregnant should have access to abortions as do women who believe they’re carrying a deformed fetus or are in a pregnancy which is life threatening (abortion is always life threatening to the individual being aborted) as justification for the entire premise of abortion on demand.

Here’s an interesting statistic regarding women seeking abortions:

“95% of abortions are done as birth control, 1% are done because of rape/incest, 1% because of fetal abnormalities, and 3% due to the mother’s health problems.”

The moral structure of our society has been altered in favor of murdering millions of defenseless individuals, depriving them of their inalienable right to life and all the other protections afforded under our constitutional republican form of government…and it’s all based on a lie; that’s right, the lie that abortion is a Women’s Health Issue when in fact 95% of lives aborted are little more than ‘after the fact contraception choices’ made to erase poor life style choices.

The socialist movement has now mandated a wide range of defined (altered the definition of words) Women’s Health Issue expenses be paid by insurance companies, which will include any government facilities paid for with taxpayer dollars.

Free, in their mind, means the recipient of goods and services no longer has to be concerned with earning enough money to pay for their incurred debts; instead, those inconsequential burdens are passed along to the State.

All these goods and services are now ‘Free’ because the State has and endless supply.  Has anyone ever explained the word ‘Free’ to those pushing socialism?  Those having to perform or provide these goods and services no longer are free to decide how to spend their efforts or money; that decision has been made by the State.

Well where does the State get all that money?  That’s right; the Evil Rich must pay for stealing from the undeserving poor.

Oregon has taken a large step towards abandoning reason in favor of satisfying those who demand the pipe dream of ‘free services for all’; neglecting to recognize there never was and never will be a free ride.  Somebody has to pay and these folks are willing to slap it on the Evil Rich who, for the most part must have obtained their ill gotten gain because of White Privilege.  This doesn’t even address moral issues; dang, I forgot we’ve already done away with morality.

We have arrived at a point in our nation’s evolution where Social Justice  is considered an equal to Due Process.

“Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law.”

Socialists, progressives, communists, call them what you will; but they don’t respect individual rights or the implication that such rights come from God.  It is their intention to do away with such antique philosophies and give the State free reign to run everyone’s lives.