Sunday, August 18, 2019

Green New Deal Runs Through Russia

Forget about A.O.C.'s Green New Deal! It is a ruse; a wily effort to slip Communism through the back door!

The Soviet Union controlled their population by essentially impoverishing them. In grounding, disarming and making Americans Vegans, the A.O.C. crowd will have done the same to their countrymen.

Make no mistake! This Green New Deal is about certain people gaining power. Real concerns are irrelevant.

Case in point: Many communities in rural America do not have access to clean drinking water, thanks to outdated infrastructure. The Government Accountability Office estimates that the costs of remedying the looming water crisis might take $190 billion in the decades to come.

Being forced to follow through with the Obama plan; to cut gas greenhouse emissions 80% by 2050 came with a price tag of $5.3 trillion dollars, per Columbia Business School economist, Geoffrey Heal. There would obviously been little money remaining for clean drinking water in rural America!

In truth, Obama's plan amounted to an excuse to push a Socialist, Globalist agenda. According to Heal, the plan would have had a marginal, if any effect on global temperatures!

Global temperatures have been rising and falling for eons. During the Minoan Warm Period,1300-1000 B.C., the Earth was about five degrees Celsius warmer than today's average. Today, Earth's temperatures are comparable to the Roman era. When Columbus was discovering the New World, we were probably three degrees cooler than today. That period was known as the "Little Ice Age."

Billions have been spent on research. Yet Government funded scientists have ignored evidence that global warming has nothing to do with carbon dioxide emissions.

This is the real problem! As carbon emissions go, we do have a problem. But, fixing the problem doesn't amount to destroying American prosperity. We already ARE the example for the rest of the world! And don't bring up our pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord! That amounted to "trusting" the United Nations with 100 million of our dollars. I don't think so...

Here are the facts about bringing about a real Green New Deal: We must forced China and India to comply. In essence, we must successfully pressure them to adopt our standard. And that won't happen. Unless, we have help...

From Russia? Are we kidding ourselves. Russia has nearly as bad of an environmental record as the Soviet Union had. How could they be anything but a nuisance, if not a deterrent?

When I first visited Russia in 1998, I was astounded to learn that the average life expectancy for Russian men was but 57! Medical sources cited the fact that 70% of Russian men smoked cigarettes, often of the highest nicotine content. Then there was the inexpensive, often preferred beverage of choice: Vodka! Today, most of those in power during Gorbachev's years are six feet under.

Gradually these old Soviet types are being replaced by the "Children of Perestroika;" those in middle and high school during Gorbachev's time. These Russians have lived for the most part with computers, cell phones and world access. Many are noticeably embarrassed with the nations' recent environmental record.

In short, America will eventually need to come to terms with Russia on a number of key issues. This might be the starting point. If we come up with a plan that we can adopt; and that amounts to American financial help for Russia to implement our emission standards, it's probable that we will gain immediate European support. At that point, our "New Green Alliance" can pretty much mandate the plan to the rest of the planet. That's the real "New Green Deal!"

The biggest opponents will likely be 70's and 80's Vintage Cold Warriors still in power, who are stuck in Gorbachev's day. Their Soviet/Russian counterparts have already passed. Now, we must either vote them out of office, or wait for them to retire, or die.

Sunday, January 27, 2019

Pelosi's Posture Assuring Trump's 2020 Re-election?

Nancy Pelosi is an vain, egotistical 79-year-old woman; the proverbial "poster girl" as to why we need congressional term limits.

Through the past week, never once was it mentioned that Donald Trump receive 306 electoral college votes in the 2016 election. Nor was it admitted that Pelosi represents one of the most "far left fringe" congressional districts in America.

Two nights ago, my wife issued a startling metaphor: She called Robert Mueller "Stalin."

This came on the heels of another metaphor: "CNN is America's Pravda."

Interesting that such an assertion would come from someone who spent her first 25 years in the former Soviet Union. Unfortunately, it is more fact than fantasy!

When I speak to friends from Alaska to Florida, from California to Maine(as I have done during in the past two weeks), it seems that literally EVERYONE favors building not simply a barrier, but a serious border wall that will inhibit traffic. I found one person, a 26 year-old-male who lived at home with his mother, who said that a wall "didn't feel right."

Yet, "polls" say otherwise. But who are these respondents? Perhaps they are they same the respondents who had Hillary Clinton winning by 7 to 14 points, the day before the 2016 presidential election.

Yesterday, Louisiana Senator, Bill Cassidy noted that "four billion dollars" had been apprehended from Mexican drug cartels in 2018. "There is the money for the wall." said the Senator. "If you go back to what was captured in 2017 and 2016, there is even more money."

Money for the wall. Mexico, in effect pays for it. Trump makes good on a campaign promise. Borders are better secured. End of discussion. Right?

Unfortunately, the discussion has gone past securing the borders. It is now a matter of Trump not being allowed to add "building a wall" to his growing string of accomplishments. The question becomes, "are Democrats that petty?"

Pelosi is. She sees Trump's agreeing to reopen the government without 100% assurance of a wall being included, as a political victory. In her mind, it was never about securing the wall, the dreamers or anything other than winning a political argument.

Should Trump simply declare an emergency? Who would object to his using confiscated drug money to achieve this goal? Chuck and Nancy would! But, they are only thinking about political aspects.

Trump knows that he will ultimately face the 9th district if he declares a national emergency. At that point, it would be a year long wait for the case to be heard by the Supreme Court. These same polls are suggesting that Americans oppose his declaring an emergency.

For those who bother to read history, Abe Lincoln made some calls that were not too popular! Had they taken polls during that time, it's likely that his approval rating would have hovered in the high 20's. Lincoln knew that in order to preserve the nation as we knew it, he would need to make some unpopular decisions.

This Lincoln did, knowing that if he did not, a determined minority might find that magic moment where they could defy the odds and achieve their objective.

That magic moment came in September 1862. CSA General Kirby Smith had between 18,000 and 20,000 battle tested, Confederate troops in Lexington. He had learned from Calvary General John Scott that the Union had "less than 5,000 raw levies" guarding Louisville.

Had Smith moved on Louisville, the Union would have evacuated the city. British Prime Minister, David Palmerston would have moved forward with his bill to recognize the Confederacy as a Sovereign nation. The American Civil War would have been over. In spite of the odds, the Southern states would have gained their independence.

Why Kirby Smith did not move is another topic for a different post. The parallel is noteworthy, in that Donald J. Trump has the machinery to end the border question, once and for all. Will he use it?

Many on the inner circle suggest that Pelosi's stiff necked, stubborn posture, coupled with the Democrats inability to find a strong challenger, will ice the 2020 election for the President. Perhaps they are right. But, what if they are not?

The country needs major immigration reform. Nearly everybody is in agreement on this subject. But, where is the compromise?

In a true compromise, neither side is totally happy. To the President's credit, he has tried to find some middle ground. The fact that the other side has shown virtually no interest in compromise, suggests that there is a motive that goes beyond the question of "do we or don't we build a border wall."

Maybe that motive is to sufficiently change the American demography just enough to tip the scales in states like Texas. This past weekend, it was discovered that 58,000 illegal votes have been tabulated over the past four years in the Lone Star state. In a close election, this could prove decisive.

We all know about California's "ballot harvesting" this past election.

And how about this endless Mueller probe? What I cannot fathom, is "why" similar action has not been taken against Hillary Clinton? Or, Obama for that matter?

We all hope that tomorrow morning, we'll awaken to a world of no media bias, no election fraud, no endless, politically inspired probes and no prejudice against insuring the safety of American citizens.

Sadly, we are not dealing with a foe that actually "gives a shit" about American citizens!

When traditional Democrats put "two and two together," many will walk away. After all, this isn't the party of Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy or even Bill Clinton.

"Give us a crime, we'll find a man." Or, "it's not who votes, it's who counts the votes." In the end, as Harvard Law Emeritus, Alan Gershoeitz, describes, "the criminalization of politics."

How utterly "Soviet!" Joseph Stalin would have been proud!

Does Nancy Pelosi see this?

Of course she does. She isn't stupid. The sad thing is that she doesn't care! She is consumed with winning a political argument and is obsessed with her hatred of Donald Trump. That is all.

Could it be enough to insure the president's reelection in 2020?

Too early to tell. There are other factors that will play in. My biggest concern in the near inevitability of voter fraud. "Where" and "to what extent" will be key questions.

Conversely, if the President declares an emergency, it will ignite a firestorm in the Democrat party. Even, if he announces that he will use confiscated monies from captured Mexican Drug lords. To his opponents, this would represent a win for the President and a fulfilled promise to his base.

Polls or no polls, border security is a winning issue for the president. Better to do as Lincoln did: Make a tough decision, knowing that the people who put you in power favor it, taking your chances with those who already oppose you on everything.

Which brings us to the final question: "When you know who your true opponent is and know that their desire is to destroy this nation, do you even want to allow this debate to continue?"

Today, Donald Trump has the Military, Homeland Security, I.C.E. and "armed America" in his corner. As distasteful as an "old fashioned, mano y mano brawl" might appear, it's also fact that the President would score a victory that would end in Communist expulsion from the continent.

We must also remember that the United States of America was never founded as a "Democracy." We are a "Republic." In short, a nation founded on "laws."

A "Democracy" has never worked over the long term. Never! They always end up as "Oligarchies."

Sooner or later, the two factions are going to fight over this question. We can either stick out heads in the sand and allow self interested "relics" like Nancy Pelosi call the shots. Or, we can "right" a long festering wrong that should have been addressed decades earlier.

Like Kirby Smith, the President is entering that "magic moment" where he can make the historical determination.

Monday, January 21, 2019

Trump's Overture Insufficient for Fantasy Based Democrats

So it's on the table!

President Donald J.Trump cagily rendered a compromise plan that is just moderate enough to generate moans from his conservative fringes. Overall however, it is brilliant.

Without getting into specifics, the President and Republicans are offering to postpone the DACA decision until after the 2020 election. This sets it on the table as a campaign issue. In process, they are providing items from the original Democrat "wish list." And, they are reopening the government.

It's all about positioning.

5.7 billion is a lot, but not really when compared to the 50 billion that we're forking out for foreign aid. If Trump were asking for fifty-seven billion, wall opponents might have a serious beef. But, it's not even twenty five billion, the original number. 5.7 billion? That's a compromise!

In a true compromise, neither side is totally happy. This proposal is no exception. If you don't believe it, ask Ann Colter! It's nothing either side wanted. But, it is a plan that Mitch McConnell thinks that he can find 60 Senate votes. If he does, it's over. Nancy Pelosi will have been outmaneuvered.

Then again, "Fancy Nancy" may not see it this way! If she doesn't,the Democrat party as we know it,will be gone. Look for at least 10% of party membership to become "walk-a-ways."

Historically, when finding themselves on the losing end of a debate, the left has cried racism.Trump's initiative most benefits those trying to get an economic leg up. As in, African Americans and Hispanic Americans! They suffer the most from the "wage depression," that results from an influx of unskilled illegal aliens into the U.S. labor market.

Many question "why" Republicans didn't answer this question when Paul Ryan was House Speaker. The answer is easy: "Paul Ryan Republicans" saw illegal aliens as an endless source of cheap labor. Many were replaced by Democrats in the midterm elections. A record number of them retired, in anticipation of primary challenges. In most cases, their districts were carried by Donald Trump in 2016.

Good, bad or indifferent, the President has found a winning issue: "Border security." Spin it as you wish, CNN, but people care! The recent skyrocketing of Hispanic approval numbers reflect as much. Pelosi's ill advised refusal to even counter the offer will open the door for Trump to declare an emergency. Conservatives hope that he will take the offensive.

This would amount to ending sanctuary cities as refuges for illegal aliens; starting with the arrests of non-compliant sanctuary city mayors. This might trigger a war. But what kind of war? And for how long?

Most of the nation simply does not have a stomach for an 1860's style bloodbath. The parts that do, are the same parts that are already armed, in hopeful anticipation that this day might come. They represent the core of Trump supporters.

Easy to see why some are so enthusiastic about gun control!

In short, it would be a massacre.

Those left leaning ideologues would realize that their far left brothers and sisters had taken them on a fateful detour. In the end, the left would lose; obliterated. It would be the most one-sided crushing in the history of warfare!

The country would subsequently take a rightward swing that would not be reversed for at least two generations. Maybe longer!

Conservatives would reference "The Naked Communist," a telltale, 1958 book written by former FBI special agent and political theorist, W. Cleon Skousen. They would rebrand the so-called,"Progressive Left" as "Communist Insurgency." Skousen's analysis would lend credence to this assertion.

It will start with education. The Department of Education in Washington D.C. would be eliminated. The National Education Association would be labeled a "Communist Insurgent Organization." All members would be precluded from ever working in the industry again. "Tenure" at all public colleges and universities would end. Each faculty member would be subject to an annual "objectivity review."

The term "separation of church and state" would be redefined. History would be consulted. It would be decided that the objective of the wording was the "keep the state out of the church." In essence, Americans didn't want a "Church of America" ala Great Britain's "Church of England," or Anglican Church. Over the years, Secularists have quietly reversed the original intent.

The "Lyndon Johnson era" edict of "disallowing churches protected tax treatment if they endorsed political candidates," would end.

America would be educated on the evils of political correctness. "P.C." would be classified as "cultural Marxism." Those advocating P.C. would be identified as "cultural Marxists." Employers would be encouraged not to hire "cultural Marxists."

Members of the Broadcast(over-the-air) media would be required to take a loyalty oath to the United States constitution. Those apprehended in the act of generating "fake news," would be treated like bankers generating fraudulent mortgage loans: They would be "precluded for life," from any employment in Broadcasting Journalism.

Sound crazy?

Think again. Governor Mike Huckabee pointed out that less that 30% of Evangelicals voted in 2012. That number climbed to almost 50% in 2016. To these Americans, it's about destiny and the ultimate "slaying of the beast."

Bottom line is this: Nancy Pelosi doesn't want to make her stand at this time. At best she will create a landscape for a 2020 presidential election which the Democrats will probably lose. At worst, she will compromise freshmen Trump districts, leading to major Republican House pickups in 2020.

In short, the nation is currently experiencing a "cold" war. Potentially, Pelosi and her party leadership could turn the "cold war" into a "hot" war.

A better idea is to try to work for the good of all of the people! Unfortunately, Nancy Pelosi doesn't care if she starts a war! Not even one that might result in two million deaths. She is "Americas political class; the ruling class." If war comes, she'll be sitting in her Geneva chateau, sipping chardonnay. It helps when you are enormously wealthy as she is!

The new Democrat left is all about "hating America and doing everything within their power to destroy it." A growing number of "salt of the earth" Americans(Hillary Clinton called them deplorables)may ultimately conclude that the only remedy is "an old fashioned ass kicking."

Unlike the first civil war, the second war won't initially be "civil!" So many of these "deplorables" harbor a belief that "the only good Communist is a dead one."

With a clash of perceptions, both sides are right in their individual assertions. The side that wins is the side with the most power.

Jefferson Davis would attest to it.

Saturday, January 5, 2019

Could Trump Declare an Emergency?

Depends on who you ask.

Friday, the President emerged from an energetic tussle with "Chuck and Nancy." He gave his assessment of the discussion. It didn't sound all bad; unless it was your paycheck that has been suspended.

On the heels of that meeting came the December economic report. For Chuck and Nancy, it took some luster off their argument. The economy created 312,000 jobs in December. For the year, wages are up nationally 3.2 %. This is actually great news, for the country. If you are a Democrat trying to find fault with Donald Trump, it's deflating!

During the holidays, I had numerous chances to discuss funding of the border wall and Trump's first two years in general. Two conversations stood out.

He was a 26-year old, unmarried man who resides with his mother. When asked "why" he opposed the wall, he stated, "it just doesn't feel right."

When asked, "do you have any alternative suggestions," his answer was "no."

At another party, a dear friend and neighbor, who happens to be a Professor of Theology at a local college in the area, blatantly emphasized. "The problem with Trump is he just doesn't have the mental capabilities to handle the Presidency."

I coyly asked, "Who would you have in mind?"

His response: "I don't know."

Bear in mind. Both people aren't stupid. From an education standpoint, both have logged more than their share of classroom time. Yet, neither could admit why they held Donald Trump in such low esteem.

Odds are, an absurdly biased mainstream media contributed to their quandary. Yesterday's MSM reaction to the economic news was comical; as if someone had let the air out of their tires.

In short, great economic news translated to their being made to look stupid. Never mind how this news impacted the country!

From a sheer journalistic perspective, what we have today are a lot of "tabloid type" news people. Gone are the days when media professionals could present a story as it was. Now "editorials" are positioned as straight news. The end result: A lot of well meaning people are confused.

From a purely historical standpoint, Donald Trump is on track to be America's greatest president! Statistics don't lie! Main Street sees this. Sorry Chuck Todd, Don Lemon, Rachael Maddow, Chris Cuomo and Morning Joe! You are making fools of yourselves! You are essentially "majoring on the minor." Time to "man up" and admit that you have been gravely wrong about practically everything regarding this presidency.

A free press is essential in a free society. Unfortunately, with freedom comes responsibility. Glamorizing a particular position, while degrading the opposition is harmful. A prime example is newly elected, New York Congresswoman, Alexandra Ortasio-Cortez.

The mainstream media has idolized her, taking a "doglike deference" to her lack of intellectual credentials. This woman didn't even know that Israel was a country? Yet, to hear the revered Wolf Blitzer speak of her, you would think that she is the second coming of Marie Curie!

The inherent danger lies in how masses react to "rabble rousers" like Congresswoman Ortasio-Cortez. Certainly the question of immigration is beyond her depth. Or is it?

Political correctness is "cultural Marxism." A self proclaimed "Democratic Socialist" and avowed "radical," Ortasio-Cortez is comfortable with such a distinction. Little does she see from her "Bronx bubble" that large parts of America are seething!

Let's return to the original question: "Could Trump declare an emergency?"

The answer is "yes." Here is how the sequence could unfold.

The proclamation is issued. "Pandemonium," mostly from paid protesters breaks out in the streets of major cities. This time, however, things proceed differently.

Acting Attorney General, Matt Carpenter, informs sanctuary city mayors that they will have "seven days" to deliver all criminal illegal aliens to I.C.E., or face arrest. The charges? "Aiding and abetting criminals" and "obstruction of justice."

Would this be legal?


Riots would ensue. ANTIFA would overwhelm law enforcement officials. At that point, the President could call upon "civilian volunteers" to "assist local law enforcement and I.C.E. maintain order" in Sanctuary cites.

How many civilian volunteers would be summoned? Expect "three to four times" the number the President called for.

Colin Woodward, a Maine native, introduced an insightful read recently. It is called, "American Nations." In this book, Woodward identified eleven different Americas, who have miraculously held together from the time of the continent's settlement. As in 1861, the Union might be tested.

The American Nations siding with the President, per Woodward, are and have been the most "warlike" of the American Nations! For many of them, a kind of joy would be unleashed. For the average civilian volunteer, it would be the culmination of decades marked by pent up frustration.

For these souls, it would amount to "we are with you, Mr. President. Don't worry about arms or transportation. We've got that covered!"

And off they would go; to California, Chicago's south side, the Bronx, Portland, Oregon and other areas that needed to experience "a reckoning." Most would be men between ages 18 and 50, in groups of four and five, graced with 12-gauge pumps, AR-15's and nine MM's.

Once there, it's doubtful that they would stop with ANTIFA protesters! Most shocking to the media establishment would be the large numbers of local loyalists who would arise, embrace and join the incoming civilians!

The"Progressive Left" movement would crushed; and later re-branded. The new moniker: "The Communist Insurgency.."

It would be then and there, that the veil would be lifted from America's eyes!

Suddenly Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump would be facing the same opposition!

In a matter of weeks, Obama holdovers would be expunged from the State Department. Finally a meaningful peace would be at hand, beginning with a pacified Iran and a united Korea. Europe would be secured. Russia, Ukraine, Georgia and Armenia would join NATO.

A unified, mostly mostly Christian world would turn to the real global threat: China, where they are now implanting computer chips in their school children! Facing that kind of firepower, the Chinese would quickly acquiesce.

This ultimate face-off would be remembered as "Faith based National Populism" versus "Secular Global Socialism." Almost overnight, it would be "cool" to be a Nationalist!

When on the losing end of an argument, the "progressive left" has always resorted to the cry of "racism." To an Alexandra Ortasio-Cortez, Donald Trump is a racist, a bigot, a fascist and a NAZI. It's doubtful that the freshman Congresswoman knows anything about "National Socialism." Here's a hint.

Were Trump a NAZI, he would propose sending the apprehended criminal illegal aliens to Alaska, where work on a railroad connecting the state to the lower 48 would commence. Criminal illegals would be assigned to a "chain gang," placed on an 800 calorie per day diet, and worked 16 hours per day.

Within a few weeks, they would be dead. The official cause of death would be "general physical weakness." NAZI rationale would insist that "they were condemned anyway, why not get a few weeks of work from them?"

Few would know of their disposition. Prisoners would spend their first day writing letters to friends and loved ones. In most cases, recipients would be reading correspondence from corpses! The large Arctic wolf population would take care of the disposal problem.The sordid deed would be "sanitized" from history, in the same manner that ANTIFA seeks to erase Confederate history.

Fortunately, Donald Trump is anything but a NAZI.If he were, the last person advising him would be his Jewish son-in-law!

One could expect "limousine liberals" such as Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters to be on the first Leer Jet out of the country.! Left behind would be the "constituents" and the bulk of the Communist Insurgency(Progressive Left), exposed as the "Sheeple."

"Constituents" are the bought and paid for members of the bureaucracy. They are often joined by "tenured" professors at colleges and universities,such as my neighbor.

Americans would be shocked to know how many of these "constituents" are Democrats! Remember, Kathleen Sebelius? For those who don't, she was the head of the I.R.S. who took the 5th, when asked IF tea party members had been targeted by the agency.

"Sheeple" are what the word implies: "People who behave like sheep," doing what they are told and never questioning the rationale. This designation holds true to the young man who voiced opposition to a border wall, while offering no alternative. A large percentage of "Sheeple" are functionally illiterate.

So goes the border wall debate. Demanding entry are roughly 2,000,000 Central Americans. Their average education level hovers around the third grade. Almost none speak English.

Statistically "two-thirds" of all illegal aliens are receiving some sort of entitlement. Many have Medicaid cards and receive food stamps.

Once in the country, they are difficult to remove. In places like California they are able to acquire drivers licenses. Democrats see them as "ready made votes." Perhaps not immediately, but they are working on it.

Republicans conclude(correctly) that a wall, fence or something that says, "you can't come in," will discourage most. The journey is long and dangerous. Not all, but probably more than half of the border traffic will be thwarted.

Few have acknowledged the degree of voter fraud that exists today. Steps addressed in "E" is for English, would immediately eliminate voter fraud, seen by many as "the single, greatest threat to our Republic." The "progressive left" fears these measures will remove "fraud and cheating" as pathways to victory. It was Joseph Stalin who said, "it's not who votes, but who counts the votes!"

There are other corrective measures that would insure that we never had another 2018. It's probable, that an "Article Five convention of states" might provide the forum to instigate these changes.

In best case, this is how the "Emergency" would end. The "left" AKA "The Communist Insurgency," having witnessed ANTIFA's violent demise, would be stunned. Then, they would do a "180 degree turn" and condemn those who lead the Communist Insurgency. Most of the Oligarchs who inspired them, would be comfortably housed in European Chateaus, having exited early. Constituents,including Academicians, would ultimately do an "about face." Sheeple would experience the cold reality of a people manipulated.

In the end, America would still be one! There would be a massive decentralization, as well as some new amendments to the constitution. With some luck, the following would unfold:

1. H.U.D., Education and E.P.A. offices in Washington D.C. would be closed. All three would be reassigned to the states.
2. A National "Catastrophic" Health Insurance pool would be created. Health insurance could be purchased across state lines. Pharmaceuticals would be purchased directly by Medicare and Medicaid. Pharmaceutical companies would be precluded from contributing to political candidates or campaigns. Lobbyists would no longer be allowed in the capital.
3. Twelve-year term limits would be enacted on all Congressmen, Senators and non-military members of the federal bureaucracy. 18-year term limits for federal judges including Supreme Court justices.
4. Federal employees would be precluded from unionization.
5. English would be adopted as the official language in the U.S..
6. Voter I.D.'s with current photographs, would be required. Early voting would be limited to "no more than 14 days" prior to election. All participants would be required to vote in person at their local precinct or fill out absentee requests, thirty days prior to the election.
7. Only U.S. Citizens would be allowed voting privileges.
8. Congressional Representation would be based on the number of "United States citizens" in a district. Not "persons."
9. Birthright citizenship would be limited to those "previously held in involuntary servitude" and/or "those born in the U.S. but having held no previous status."
10. Immigration would be "merit based." The "immigration lottery" would be eliminated.

The founding fathers were deeply concerned about a government that might get away from the people. The Article Five convention of states was their stopgap measure that would address it.

Not addressed was whether a sitting president might preside over an Article Five convention. If this were the path chosen by Donald Trump, he would essentially be doing something similar to what Abraham Lincoln did.

In retrospect, Lincoln did the unimaginable. But historians credit him with "saving the union."

Trump would be doing something similar, albeit less profound.

It would later be referred to as "The Great Reckoning." Americans would see how close they came to having their country stolen from them by a tiny group of corrupt, insiders now commonly referred to as the "deep state."

In reality, the Alexandra Ortasio-Cortez' are nothing short of diversions. Lying beneath is a dark objective of a one-world socialist order, inspired by demonic figures such as Mao zedong.

Saturday, December 29, 2018

"Socotra" Anyone?

What in hell's name is a "Secotra?" Better question, "what is Socotra?" Or, even better, "Where is Socrotra?"

Answer: "Socotra is a "Rhode Island sized" island, with three additional tiny islands that amount to rock outcroppings, 220 miles south of Yemen, less than 100 miles west of the "Horn" of Africa.

It's ownership has been pass around over the centuries. Today,it's owned by Yemen.

The 60,000 or so indigenous people are unique. Their language is an Arabic derivative. The island saw Christianity early. Thomas the Apostle is credited to have gone there in 52 A.D.. Socotra was predominantly Christian until the late 10th century. By the 17th century it had given way to Islam.

At 12 degrees latitude N, Socotra enjoys a warm to hot dry climate. The coastal areas, mostly white, sandy beaches, received a scant ten inches per rain per year. Offshore breezes moderate the often hot temperatures. Mountains and rock formations create a seascape that borders on spectacular!

Interior elevation nears 5,000 feet, allowing it to catch 40 inches of rain annually. The additional precipitation creates moving streams and clear pools of fresh water throughout Socotra's rugged interior.

There are hundreds of plant and flora specifies exclusive to the island. Possibly the most unique are the "Blood Trees."

There are bird species found nowhere else in the world.

Much to the chagrin of ecologists, goats were introduced to the island in the 11th century. They readily thrived and became a staple of the local diet. But they grazed on local plants that were found in no other place on the globe.

Over the centuries, locals made their living almost exclusively from the sea. Agriculture was limited, but tobacco has always done well. Dates, from the islands massive Date Palm Trees, are the leading export crop.

Sea landings have always been available, the three-month Monsoon season notwithstanding. Portuguese sailors referred to the Monsoon winds and seas as the "Lion of Socotra."

Socotra has been spared most of the fallout from Saudi Arabia's war with Yemen. The United Arab Emirates has recently built an airport on the island. Today there is growing uncertainty of the long term disposition of the island. It's strategic importance as a potential supply depot is clearly in focus.

I say, "Let's buy it!"

Iran would protest bitterly. Russia might not like it. China definitely wouldn't like it.


The Yemeni are broke! The Saudi's owe us a favor.

Environmentalists will recognize the importance of saving literally dozens of plant and bird species from possible extinction, that could result from a war. Neo-Cons would quickly forgive President Trump for the Syria pullout.

Under U.S. ownership, 60,000 Socotrans would be granted automatic citizenship. Many would opt to stay on the island and live on generous American entitlements. However, large numbers of the younger people would choose to explore the mainland.

It is probable that the non-indigenous goats would be extracted, in an effort to preserve the delicate fauna. Motor vehicles are currently and would continue to be prohibited in the island's interior and a large part of the coastal areas.

With one exception, American occupants would be restricted to Scientific and Military personnel. The exception would be those convicted of "attempting to undermine" the Republic. In essence, "the Deep State."

Some consider that these nimble insiders as nothing short of treasonists! Treason usually carries the death penalty. I don't think Americans are out for blood. Nor, are they seeing these "deep staters" with vindictive eyes. It amounted to entrusted people looking at their own interests first, the nations' second.

So, you create thee utopia for them that they themselves tried to create; with a different twist.

"Guests" would receive everything from a quaint, comfortable adobe homestead, to a never ending wardrobe of "Luke Skywalker style" white two-piece robes. Do you remember what he wore in the original Star Wars movie?

Each week, "guests" will draw rations, including candles, at the base commissary. Everything a soldier might receive will be there, including beer, booze and even marijuana.

One doctor for every 100 guests. Sorry! But that was actually better than what Obamacare ultimately offered to millions of Americans. Emergency procedures? Probably, if it's not "too often" and/or "too many!"

Cable TV? Cell Phones? No chance! Guest would be allowed thirty minutes per week for calls to immediate family members only;from a designated commissary phone area. Friends and relatives would be allowed to send guests magazine subscriptions, from an approved list.

Guests would essentially return to the simple things, the way they did them in Jesus' day. Friendships could better be developed. Individual creativity would be at a premium.

A lot of Americans would consider "being a lifetime guest" in Socotra more reward that punishment.

Meanwhile, the United States would have effectively "killed three birds with one stone."

Without question, a seaport, airport and supply depot in that dangerous part of the world could prove invaluable.

Can we honestly trust anyone to preserve this miracle of nature; other than the world's top ecologists? Socotra is utterly, "otherworldly." If one were looking for the perfect "set" for a movie taking place on an alien planet, look no further!

Those "deep state operatives" should be punished. But who said that punishment need be restricted to a conventional correctional institution?

These people in so many cases, used technology and inside information to advance their own personal causes. This punishment amounts to their living without technology, with only dated information.

I say, "pretty damned fitting!"

Sunday, November 18, 2018

The Four American Paths

Four choices. Four distinct paths. We have them. The questions become, "will we choose the path? Or, will it be chosen for us?"

Let's start with the first path; the path preferred by career politicians: "Let's do nothing; things will work themselves out. They always do." In other words, let's "react, not act." We'll return to choice "A" shortly.

Choice "B," amounts to "we should take a more literal approach to the 10th amendment. If the constitution doesn't assign a specific function to the federal government, it is presumed that the function is reserved for the individual state." It's probable that "Dixiecrats" would be overjoyed!

Choice "C," would conclude that the country was simply too divided to continue as one nation and "peacefully separate." We have seen a lot of evidence that some of the states are already considering this. California stands as a prime example.

Choice "D" would rebuff separation ideas. It would be a war for all the marbles, likely making the first American civil war look liked a church social.

Choice "D" appears unlikely(albeit 15% of the country would disagree). It stands to reason that the nation doesn't have the stomach for a 1860's vintage bloodbath! It's probable that those living then would have opted out, had they enjoyed a 21st century media!It is now believed that as many as 750,000 American casualties were inflicted, up from 600,000. This is more than in all other wars COMBINED since the revolution...

Choice "C" would amount to "giving up," by many Americans. Yet, there is support from both the left and right. For argument's sake, let's briefly assume that separation was the verdict. In a 2016 post, I covered the geographical divide that might come if Hillary Clinton had been elected in a disputed election.

In that post it predicted that the split would cross the northern border. It also predicted that Tim Draper's "six Californias" would become a reality. At this writing, smart money would suggest that the Great Lakes States would join the lower Midwest, far West, South and three of six Californias, as defined by Draper.

The Western half of Washington, Oregon and British Columbia would become the nation of "Cascadia." The cultural distinction already exists.

Ontario and Canadian provinces East of the Rocky mountains would join the "flyover American" states.

New York and New England would be joined by Canada's Atlanta provinces forming the "Peoples' Democratic Republic of America."

Quebec would achieve their long dream of independence, and join Honduras and El Salvador as "third world counties" in North America.

Three of Draper's six California's would be joined by the Big Island of Hawaii to form "Pacifica," AKA "Elysium."(The remaining islands would stay with the money) If you haven't watched the Matt Damon movie, you should; if you want to see the illustration.

Compared to choices "C" and "D," choice "B" would certainly be preferable. In short, America would rediscover the 10th amendment. Much would be the same as now. The military, border security, social security and medicare would continue to be handle from Washington. Other issues, such as abortion, marijuana and prayer in the public schools would be determined at the state level. It's possible that housing and urban development, the environment, energy and education might all return to the states. Money utilized would be divided proportionately, based on contribution.

Choice "A" is obviously preferred by lawmakers. It's the easiest! Yet, we may not have the luxury of resorting to choice "A."

When you have Socialists such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandra Ortasio-Cortez spouting "rabble rousing rhetoric" as they are and there are contested elections as we are experiencing, the latter three options become more imminent.

Not because we chose then. But, because the choice was thrust upon us.

Sunday, November 11, 2018

Voter Fraud Must be Eliminated at all Costs

What is currently taking place in Florida confirms why voter fraud is, or should be, a top ticket issue.

For those who read "E" is for English, you recall that the issue was discussed thoroughly. A solution was offered. At the time of publication, opposition suggested that the methodology might have been "too extreme." Today, more Americans are seeing the wisdom of the proposal.

Essentially, the proposal called for the requirement of "passage of a fourth grade English proficiency test" as a prerequisite for a voter Identification card. No pass. No card. No vote.

Opponents quickly proclaimed that any form of literacy test would "return America to the days of Jim Crow and voter suppression." At first glance, they might have a valid argument.

In Robert Caro's "Lyndon Johnson-Master of the Senate," stark examples were given of literacy tests designed to disenfranchise African American voters. The proposal detailed in "E" is for English, had a different objective.

The exam would be standardized nationally; by professionals who do it for a living. Specifically, the same people who create the LSAT, the GMAT, GRE, SAT and the ACT, who sit in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The objective would be single minded: "Insuring that all voters could English at a 4th grade level."

The argument against was seemingly valid: "It would disenfranchise large blocks of the population."

The counter argument stated, "if you cannot read at a fourth grade level, it's probable that you will not be capable of reading a complicated voting ballot.

The conclusion was "a paradigm shift" in America would need to occur. In short, Americans would need to see "voting as a privilege, not a right."

As expected, the cost of such an exam would be exponential. A "five-cent per household "residential access tax" levied on commercially and politically oriented direct mail," would pay for the measure.

Included in the measure would be the prize for passage of the exam: A "voter I.D. card, complete with photograph and thumb print."

The "E" Amendment also addressed two other "thorny" problems that have recently arisen.

One was "birthright citizenship." The "E" amendment called for defining birthright citizenship as "any person previously born in the United States who had been engaged in involuntary servitude or had held no previous status." The 14th amendment's framers had intended to include freed slaves and people of color who resided in America but enjoyed no status.
Unfortunately, manipulation followed.

Some concluded that American citizenship amounted to "flying over to have a baby," subsequently taking advantage of the easy "chain migration" standard. Others concluded that it translated to "making a mad dash across the desert" in hopes of getting through border security, with the goal of "knocking out a baby."

When Donald Trump took exception to both practices, he was called a racist, bigot, fascist, NAZI, white supremacist and everything in between!

The amendment required that all voters be United States Citizens.

It also called for basing congressional representation on "U.S. Citizens not persons." This idea actually was introduced a decade earlier by then Louisiana Senator, David Vitter. If adopted, California would lose six House seats, New York two and Illinois one. Oregon, Indiana, Tennessee, North Carolina,Georgia, Texas, Nebraska and Montana would add a seat each.

The "E" amendment proposed a "points" system for immigration, beginning with English proficiency and age. It also gave points for levels of education, profession and/ or a trade. Lastly, it gave points for country of origin. Those applicants from N.A.T.O. countries would be given a preference.

The proposed "American English Unification Amendment," AKA the "E" Amendment, would make English the official language by constitutional amendment. The previously named measures would be included.

Then Pro-English Director, Jayne Cannava called the proposed "E" Amendment, "a magnificent way to accelerate assimilation." U.S. English Director, Mario Mujica added that "87% of Americans favored" making English the official language in the country..

As expected, the American left would vehemently object to the proposed amendment. Mainly because it would eliminate "cheating" as a path to citizenship! Not to mention, winning elections! In their minds, those favoring passage of the E" amendment would be nothing short of "racists, bigots, fascists, NAZIs,and white supremacists."

Anticipating violence, the book called for "Eagles for America," a grassroots, nationwide support base, who would counter any insurgency that would be certain to spring from this amendment. While the book called for "non-violence," it is predictable that the "Eagles"would become the counter balance to ANTIFA.

The book suggested a concerted lobbying effort, designed to encourage politicians to pass the amendment, heavily relying on social media. In reality, "Eagles for America" could become a counter balance to the ANTIFA mobs.

From a constitutional perspective, it is easy to argue that 38 states would ratify this amendment. I have not heard from the President as of yet. But, he was mailed a copy of "E" is for English. I would think that if it makes it through his handlers, he might be the first to advocate it.

One thing is for certain: If "E" were the law of the land, there would be no Florida controversy at hand at this writing.

Also a definite is we would have a "stronger, smarter, more secure nation" as the book promised.