Thursday, April 27, 2017

The United States is NOT a Nation of Immigrants



I am sick of hearing this nonsensical bumper sticker crap, “America is a nation of immigrants.”  I am not an immigrant and neither are the vast majority of the citizens who populate this country.  I doubt 75% of the populace can name an ancestor who immigrated to the United States because they are so far removed.


The rebuttal I normally get is the only people who are not immigrants on the North American continent are native Indians.  Oh, really?  Weren’t we taught their ancestors crossed a land bridge from Siberia back in the Ice Age?  Actually, scientists can back up this claim with DNA test.


The simple fact is world history is replete with constant migrations and most of it unwelcome.  Let’s take Spain as an example, in 237 BC the Carthaginians invaded (or should we say migrated) the Iberian Peninsula.  Then came the Romans and after them the Visigoths and then the Moors.  And I’m sure the vanquished welcomed these conquering "immigrants" with open arms.




A nation consists of a people who have a common culture, language, history and governing principles.  They forge a social compact and those who wish to join must legally ask for permission and then adopt and assimilate to those guiding principles.  We call this citizenship; a nation cannot exist without it.    

Source:



A Libtard Leaves North Carolina



A libtard has had enough of North Carolina and plans on leaving.  Here is his departing missive to all the troglodytes that infest the Tar Heel state.

Why I’m leaving Charlotte and N.C.
The first thing I noticed when moving to Charlotte was that when I turned on my turn signal, the empty space in the lane next to me disappeared. My reasons for leaving Charlotte and North Carolina are: Coal ash, HB2, I-77, voter suppression, regressive sales and property tax policies that underfund public education and facilitate segregated K-12 public schools, Naegleria fowleri amoeba, gerrymandering, weakening Gov. Cooper, challenging the Supreme Court over same-sex marriage.
WESTON METZ, HUNTERSVILLE


The next time I'm stuck on I-77, which is almost everyday, I'll remember Weston Metz and smile.

Source:

Red State, America's Economic Future is Bright





Red state, America you are looking good!  Strut your bad self on over here and give us a twirl.  Wow, your future is so bright we need to put on some shades.  What do I see?  Is that you Mississippi?  I tell you, those blue state commies are eating their words right about now.  You went from a 43rd ranking in an ALEC-Laffer 2005 – 2015 economic rating to a projected outlook of 22 in 2017.  New York is dead last!  Who’s the gummer now, libtards?




Somebody tell the morons at the Charlotte Observer that our General Assembly’s Republican supermajority has propelled the state of North Carolina from 9th place to 3rd.  The editorial board just can’t seem to keep those good economic policies down despite their ridiculous characterizations.




 
Source:


United Nations Warns U.S. on Obamacare Repeal



Did you know that repealing Obamacare is considered a violation of international law?  According to the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, the United States no longer has sovereignty over its domestic affairs.  Here is an excerpt from Fox News:

The Post reported that the confidential, five-page memo cautioned that the repeal of the Affordable Care Act would put the U.S. “at odds with its international obligations.”
The warning was sent to the State Department and reportedly said the U.N. expressed “serious concern” about the prospective loss of health coverage for 30 million people, that in turn could violate “the right to social security of the people in the United States.”

Did Barack Obama surrender our sovereignty to a bunch of U.N. bureaucrats?  I wouldn’t be surprised if he did considering the whole Iran fiasco.

Source:

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Progressives Reconstruct History and the United States



Progressives have been on a mission to fundamentally transform the United States for over 150 years.  The great leap from federalism to nationalism couldn’t have happened without the War of Northern Aggression and Reconstruction.  Southern secession became a catalyst for centralized power and ironically will lead to the dissolution of a union the Yankee invaders purportedly wanted to save.


Before anyone gets offended, I want to emphasize this post is about Progressives, the U.S. Constitution and the federalist principles therein and not about slavery.  I realize this distinction can be difficult for some; however, one must try to analyze this perspective from a federalist viewpoint.
     

How can one define Reconstruction?  You would think it a term for an epoch in American history where the conquerors helped the vanquished get back on their feet by easing them into the union after a devastating civil war.  This interpretation is completely false.  What happened was the equivalent of the Progressive Era’s Eugenics Movement:  Southerners will restructure the way they think, act and live their lives according to the dictates of their Yankee masters, or be sterilized from the political process.  Congressional Reconstruction was all about power and control and to hell with federalism. 
  

The Radical Republicans wanted to ensure their hegemonic rule by forcing the 14th Amendment upon a prostrate people.  Twelve states refused to swallow this poisoned pill, which had a provision that disenfranchised southerners who volunteered to fight for the Confederacy.  This act of defiance brought about the third phase of Reconstruction:  the South was divided into five military districts and ruled by military governors.


Military occupations breed resentment and enmity which ultimately leads to failure.  Reconstruction was and is considered a colossal failure.  A generation of historians, often referred to as the Dunning School, documented the abuses and corruption of the Radical Republicans and their agents of occupation.  This resentment manifested itself in the rise of the KKK and Jim Crow laws that were implemented shortly after the Northern occupation was lifted.


 If you are a student of the Reconstruction era, you’ll notice that today’s colleges and universities are filled with Marxist who has a bitter resentment toward the so-called Dunning School.  Almost every book I’ve read on this subject contains what can only be considered a smear campaign against these early historians.  Eric Foner in particular impugns the character of these men by assigning racist motives.  Ironically, these men were northerners and one reporter, James Pike, served in the Lincoln administration.  I’ve never experienced this kind of vitriol in other disciplines of history.


However, one must note today’s Reconstruction historians subscribe to the tactics of W.E.B. Du Bois who invented one of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.


Du Boise seems to be a guiding figure for today’s historians, not to mention the fact that he too was a Marxist.  There seems to be a consensus by Progressives that the failures of Reconstruction were the defunding of the Freedmen’s Bureau and a lack of willingness to redistribute land and money which translates into confiscation of property.  Some even consider the withdrawal of troops a contributing factor as well.  Few are willing to accept that invasion, occupation, disenfranchisement, and forced homogenization were the main factors for the failures of Reconstruction.



One thing is for sure; Progressives will not accept the failures of a top-down centralized government, perhaps that’s why today’s Marxist historians are so vitriolic in their condemnation of critics of Reconstruction. 

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Will Attorney General Jeff Sessions Investigate Obama's Justice Department?



In order to restore confidence in Washington D.C. and in particular the Justice Department, the American people need to know what happened with cases such as Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS scandal and particularly Hillary Clinton’s violation of the Espionage Act.

Hugh Hewitt, a radio talk show host, asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions if he had any intentions on investigating Obama’s highly politicized Justice Department.  The AP reported the following:

Sessions was noncommittal but left the door open, saying he would do everything he could to "restore the independence and professionalism of the Department of Justice."


"So we would have to consider whether or not some outside special counsel is needed," Sessions said. "Generally, a good review of that internally is the first step before any such decision is made."

I guess the answer to that is don't hold your breath. 

Source: