The Night King Commands Snowflake Generation

Winter is coming!

Snowflakes around the country are throwing tantrums over statues and paintings that offend their delicate sensibilities. Our founding fathers, who are responsible for the liberties we enjoy, are under attack by a generation of ingrates. These summer children have fallen prey to an evil influence that wish to destroy our history and humanity.

The news is filled with libtard absurdities. Take a look around. The country is inundated with snowflake blizzards: students at Hofstra University defaced a statue of Thomas Jefferson; special interest groups in Northern California demand murals of George Washington be removed, and who can forget the fiasco over a Robert E. Lee statue in Charlottesville, Virginia. One is practically snowblind by stupidity.

I believe it is safe to assume that this snowflake generation are fans of Game of Thrones; assuming mommy and daddy subscribe to HBO. We recently found out the true purpose of the Night King. Here is an excerpt from Vulture.com:

“He wants to erase this world, and I am its memory.”

About halfway through “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms,” Bran tells the assembled Winterfell Avengers that the Night King isn’t simply set on destroying humankind. He is, very specifically, after our beetle-browed young seer.

The war council accepts this explanation at face value. “That’s what death is, isn’t it?” marvels Sam. “Forgetting. Being forgotten. If we forget where we’ve been and what we’ve done, we’re not men anymore. Just animals.”

I wonder if these progressive zombies and their Antifa shock troops see the irony in the Game of Thrones’ Night King and his quest to destroy humanity’s memory. His quest seems to coincide with their own.

Source:

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=12043

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46683/high-school-mulls-removing-george-washington-joseph-curl

https://www.vulture.com/2019/04/game-of-thrones-night-king-bran-memory.html

Medicare-for-All: The Audacity of Stupid

I didn’t have a problem with health care until the federal government fixed it. For decades, we were told by Washington D.C., and their liberal shock troops, that cost were too high and our insurance was junk. Well, these geniuses put an end to that, didn’t they? Now, our deductibles have trebled, and premiums for some families cost as much as their mortgages. Let’s give a big hand to our lords and masters; these people sure no how to fix things. Boy, I can’t wait for Medicare-for-all.

Talk about fixing things, Rep. Maxine Waters chaired a hearing on student loan debt. She then lectured bank executives. Here is an excerpt of that exchange from the Daily Caller:

Democratic California Rep. Maxine Waters challenged bank executives during a Wednesday morning hearing, appearing to blame them for the student debt crisis.

What she appeared to leave out was the fact that student loans were nationalized nearly a decade ago under former President Barack Obama to cut banks’ ability to offer government-backed loans.

“By cutting out the middleman, we’ll save the American taxpayers $68 billion in the coming years,” Obama said when he signed the legislation in 2010. “That’s real money.”

Waters now chairs the committee that oversees those student loans.

Waters began by explaining the student debt crisis, saying, “Today, there are more than 44 million Americans that owe … $1.56 trillion in student loan debt.”

She added, “Last year, 1 million student loan borrowers defaulted which is on top of the 1 million borrowers who defaulted the year before.”

Then, Waters turned the questions on the bank executives, asking what they intended to do about the student debt crisis: “What are you guys doing to help us with the student loan debt? Who would like to answer first? Mr. Monihan? Big bank?”

“We stopped making student loans in 2007 or so,” he responded.

“So you don’t do it anymore? Mr. Corbyn?” she pressed the next banker.

“We exited student lending in 2009,” he replied.

“Mr. Dimon?” Waters tried again.

“When the government took over student lending in 2010, we stopped doing all student lending,” he said


Wouldn’t you think, Rep. Maxine Waters, should know this? She, afterall, was in Congress when the Obama administration nationalized student loans. Worse, the first banker reminded her of this fact, but she kept asking the others. Talk about audacity of stupid!

Therein lies the problem: we have a bunch of morons running the country and they want more power over our lives.

We have people in Congress who can’t remember what happened ten years ago, how can we expect them to understand economic principles that have been established for thousands of years. One of the biggest problems our country faces is a lack of appreciation for history.

Medicare-for-all will institute universal wage and price controls. Wage and price controls are a proven failure. Nixon failed in 1971. FDR failed with the National Industrial Recovery Act. As a matter of fact, we can go all the way back to Emperor Diocletian of the Roman empire. His policies are said to have instituted the feudal system that dominated Europe for over a century.

Maybe, that’s what our wannabe overlords want to institute, a new kind of slavery: a government of the swamp, by the swamp and for the swamp.

Source:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/04/10/maxine-waters-pin-student-debt-banks-forgets-nationalized/

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/education/279512-president-obamas-horrible-terrible-legacy-on-student-loans

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/remembering-nixons-wage-price-controls

https://www.britannica.com/topic/National-Industrial-Recovery-Act

https://mises.org/library/price-fixing-ancient-rome

Beware of Doctrinaires at Historic Columbia

This Labor Day weekend, I decided to tour parts of Columbia, South Carolina. I visited the state capitol, select cemeteries, and, of course, a few historical homes; one, of which, marred my trip. I was so disturbed by this visit, I posted to Yelp as a warning to others:


This is the first time I’ve posted on Yelp and I do so as a warning to students of history. As an enthusiast, I spend my vacations visiting historical sites and homes so as to get a better insight into prominent figures and families that I’ve read about. Usually these tours center on the subject at hand; not so at Historic Columbia and particularly at the Hampton-Preston home. Instead, I was treated to an alternative history by a college student that’s neither accurate or original.


I’m sure this doctrinaire was given a script but that’s no excuse for her attitude. She insisted that the States’ Rights doctrine was solely about slavery and that the soldiers who fought for the Confederacy did so for the preservation of slavery. She derived this premise based upon “the documentary evidence” of the Confederate Constitution. I tried to inform this young lady that a small percentage of the population owned slaves and that their constitution was written by a political elite. I also tried to inform her that four states didn’t secede until Lincoln demanded states conscription and financial aid to the Union cause. But that didn’t matter; she would have none of it. She didn’t even understand the Southerners of that time considered the war a Northern invasion.



I found it funny that this young lady lamented today’s “revisionist history.” A student of this era would know that the Lost Cause doctrine has been around since Reconstruction. You’ll find this lament in writings from carpetbaggers like Albion Tourgee; Marxist such as W.E.B. DuBoise; and red-diaper babies such as Eric Foner.. The only thing new that I’ve discovered by today’s revisionist historians is that the States’ Rights doctrine had nothing to do with tariffs and punitive federal policies, all Northerners were abolitionist and that all Southerners were rabid slave holders. So sayeth modern academia; so sayeth their doctrinaires.

The American Civil War: The North Couldn't Afford Secession

A couple of years ago, I wrote a blogpost questioning the reasons for the American Civil War. I stated that there was more to the North’s naked aggression than just slavery. Historians, for the most part, have neglected northern complacency and the financial repercussions had the South left the union.


Today, California radicals are proposing a referendum to leave the union. Many people, such as myself, are just fine with that. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass!

I’m sure this is the same attitude many Northerners had at the time the South seceded. My suspicions were correct. Here is an excerpt from an article published in the Abbeville Institute by Philip Leigh about an interview on PBS:


She fails to consider that Northerners could have let the cotton states leave in peace, thereby avoiding a Civil War altogether. The original seven-state Confederacy was so weak that many believed her component states might end up humbly asking to be readmitted to the Federal Union. According to historian David Potter: “No one was much impressed with the Gulf Coast Confederacy. No one was convinced that it would be economically or politically viable.”[1]

Moreover, many Northern leaders were prepared to “Let the erring sisters go in peace.” Among them was abolitionist Horace Greeley, then editor of The New York Tribune, which was America’s largest newspaper. Greeley wrote, “We have repeatedly said . . . that if the slave states choose to form an independent nation, they have the right to do so.” President James Buchanan added that many Republicans shared Greeley’s opinion when he wrote: “Leading Republicans everywhere scornfully exclaimed ‘Let them go;’ ‘We can do better without them;’ ‘Let the Union slide,’ and other language of the same import.” Ohio lawyer and future Republican President Rutherford Hayes was satisfied to let the free states remain alone as his January 4, 1861 diary entry reveals: “The [twenty] free states alone . . . will make a glorious nation . . . scarcely inferior in real power to the thirty-three states we had on the first of November.”[2] Similarly, President Lincoln’s future War Secretary, Edwin Stanton, said, “Oh, I would let the South go; they will be clamoring to get back in three years.”

Interesting. How about the economic consequences of the South leaving the union? There are a couple of possibilities the North would have to confront. Mr. Leigh continues:

First, it could not hope to maintain a favorable balance of payments. The South accounted for about 80% of America’s exports on the eve of the Civil War. Thus, without the South’s export economy, America would become a perpetual debtor nation forever at the mercy of its stronger trading partners that would deplete her gold supply in order to settle the persistent trade imbalances.

Second, since the Confederate constitution outlawed protective tariffs, her lower tariffs would confront the remaining states of the abridged Union with two consequences. First, since ninety percent of Federal taxes came from tariffs, the government’s revenue loss would be sizable. Articles imported into the Confederacy from Europe would divert tariff revenue from the North to the South. Second, and even more importantly, a low Confederate tariff would induce Southerners to buy manufactured goods from Europe as opposed to the Northern states where prices were inflated by protective tariffs.

In other words, the North couldn’t afford to let the South go. I wasn’t taught that in school and no doubt neither was the rest of the country, not even Southerners. What’s that saying? To the victor belongs the spoils. And that goes for history as well.

Source:

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/causes-of-the-civil-war/?mc_cid=abd07423aa&mc_eid=3fe7d9c1ad



https://costonscomplaint.blogspot.com/2016/01/have-progressive-historians-bastardized.html

Government Sponsored Economic Crises

I was talking to a customer the other day and he brought up a subject that I suspected was happening, but don’t want to believe: We are in another housing bubble. 

I hope he’s wrong, but all the signs are there. We all remember the last one. Many businesses and families were destroyed because of that federal government created disaster. Why do I say that? Because that crisis couldn't have happened without government sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and all the Clinton cronies who ran those two organizations.

As a student of history, I can’t help but notice that most economic calamities that befall our country have been induced by the federal government. For instance, let’s take the Panic of 1873. Jay Cooke became the richest man in the country due to his financial dealings with the federal government, that was until his empire crashed bringing about one of the worst depressions in American history. Here is an excerpt from Murray N. Rothbard’s, The Progressive Era:


The railroad financier with the closest ties to the Republican administration was the redoubtable banker, Jay Cooke, head of Jay Cooke & Co. A small Philadelphia financier at the outset of the Civil War, Cooke had the vision to found his banking house and to wangle from the federal government a monopoly on underwriting the massive bond issues floated during the war. To sell them to the gullible public, Cooke launched the first modern propaganda campaign for selling the bonds, employing thousands of subagents and such slogans for the credulous as “A national debt a national blessing.”


Cooke obtained the highly lucrative monopoly underwriting concessions from Washington through his influence on Secretary of Treasury Salmon P. Chase. Cooke’s brother, Henry, was a long-time aide of Chase, from the latter’s tenure of Governor of Ohio,. Henry then followed Chase to WAshington. After extensive wining and dining of Chase, and after demonstrating his propaganda methods in selling government bonds, Jay Cooke won the coveted concession that was to make him one of the richest men in America and his new Jay Cooke & Co. by far the leading investment bank. Cooke became widely known as “The Tycoon,” and the phrase “as rich as Jay Cooke” became a popular saying.

One of the casualties of the Panic of 1873 was the Freedman’s Bank. This institution’s clientele consisted of ex-slaves, mainly veterans of the Union army, who entrusted their life savings to a bank they thought was backed by the federal government. Boy were they wrong, especially after Henry Cooke got his mitts on it. Here is an excerpt from Mr. Speaker by James Grant:


In 1870, they amended the charter to permit a more liberal policy. No more was the management restricted to buying dull government bonds but could now roll the dice in real estate. Up, therefore, went a splendid new headquarters building for the bank on Pennsylvania Avenue. It was in this same year that the board fell under the spell of Henry D. Cooke brother of the era’s most bedazzling financier, Jay Cooke. Under Cooke’s leadership, the Freedman’s Bank finance committee took to calling the reserve fund “idle money.” Why bother with a rainy-day fund when the sun shone bright?


What extent Henry Cooke played into the demise of this institution is debatable. The Freedman’s Bank was rife with mismanagement and outright fraud; it wouldn’t have survived either way. But the underlying belief was this bank was guaranteed by the federal government and many a petition was filed decades after and all for naught. The federal government paid not one penny to a depositor.


One of the biggest shoes yet to drop is our national debt. When this federal government behemoth befalls our country, it will put all other depressions to shame. And this couldn’t have happened without the Federal Reserve (another government sponsored entity) and the greenback. Here is another excerpt from Mr. Speaker! By James Grant:


The Greenback furor is calculated to mystify most patrons of a 21st century automatic teller machine, for whom paper money is the only money they know. Not since 1971 has the dollar been remotely backed by gold, and not since 1933 has an American citizen been able to exchange paper for gold, or gold for paper, at a fixed, statutory rate. From the millennial vantage point, therefore, the paper dollar is the modern contrivance, the gold dollar the anachronism. Not so, however, in the late 1870’s. At the time, gold was the money of the future, as it had been in the past. As Reed was finishing his first congressional term and beginning his second, the gold standard was being institutionalized in Europe. Silver, now much the cheaper of the two precious metals, was the money of Mexico, China, India and other such poor and forlorn lands. Paper, held the enemies of Solon Chase, was the money of communism and anarchy.

Without fiat money, communists like Bernie Sanders and his acolytes wouldn’t have a platform to stand on. And when this whole house of cards falls around us the anarchists will have their day.


Source:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/grant-panic/
https://www.cbcnationalbankmortgage.com/fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-how-they-impact-real-estate/

Progressive Victors Bust the "Trust" in Historical Accuracy

History belongs to the victors and Progressives have definitely conquered academia. I don’t know how many times I’ve questioned the veracity of some of these professors’ assertions; after all, they’re scholars whose life’s work is devoted to a particular discipline. Most would say these men/women of letters deserve our respect. I would agree if they reported actual history instead of propaganda.


Some of these historical propagations don't pass the smell test. For instance, we’re told Theodore Roosevelt ran against his successor and former friend, Howard Taft, in the 1912 presidential election because Taft wasn’t “progressive enough.” Does that sound plausible to you? How about Roosevelt’s motivation for busting up Standard Oil? Was the old Trust Buster’s motivations pure?

I’m currently reading Murray Rothbard’s, The Progressive Era and some of these revelations are completely mind blowing. Here is a footnote that took me aback:

Knox left the attorney general position to become a senator in mid-1904, so he couldn’t have been that crucial in the government’s antitrust suit against Standard Oil. Regardless, Rothbard’s international motivation for explaining Roosevelt’s harsh attack on Rockefeller, which he at another time described as one which “there are no hard facts to prove it,” provides an intriguing global dimension to the clash between the Morgan and Rockefeller financial groups during the Progressive Era and beyond. In a later unwritten chapter, Rothbard planned to describe how Roosevelt’s successor in 1908, William Howard Taft, although put in by the Morgan ambit, was actually closer to the Rockefeller forces. As a result, in the middle of his presidency the Taft administration started to initiate antitrust suits against Morgan companies, in particular U.S. Steel and International Harvester, as retaliation for the Roosevelt assault on Rockefeller interests. Therefore, in order to deny Taft reelection in 1912 the Morgan interests formed the Progressive Party and put Roosevelt on the ticket. This heavily pietist, intellectual and Morgan-laden party was able to deny Taft reelection and allow for the Democratic candidate, Woodrow Wilson, to win the White House.


Historians agree that Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson were progressives. What they won’t tell us is the financial interest that were backing them and advocating for legislation that propel their interest. Trust busters indeed, it all depends on whose “trust” is getting busted.

The Similarities Between Presidents Andrew Johnson and Donald Trump

Last week, I was scanning the local radio stations when I happened upon an NPR interview featuring Jon Meacham. If I’m not mistaken, this man was an editor for Newsweek magazine and now fashions himself a presidential historian. As far as I’m concerned, liberals are incapable of truth, and their historiographies should be looked upon with a suspect eye.


The following excerpt is an illustration of Mr. Meacham's history:


STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

The election of President Trump got Jon Meacham thinking. Meacham is a journalist and historian. He's written biographies of presidents. He wrote a book about faith. The 2016 election prompted him to combine those two subjects and more in a book called "The Soul Of America." It's an exploration of the history of a country whose soul, he says, includes Martin Luther King and the Ku Klux Klan and much in between.



JON MEACHAM: The question I get asked all the time is, has it ever been this bad? And the answer is yes. In fact, it's been worse. We are in a very, I believe, perilous moment because of the president of the United States. I will state that. But I also think it's worth pointing out that Andrew Johnson announced that African-Americans were genetically incapable of self-government.



INSKEEP: This is the president after the Civil War.



MEACHAM: He was a bully. He was self-absorbed. He gave self-pitying speeches. Any of this sound familiar? You know, as Mark Twain is reputed to have said - history may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme. The story of American history is that we have, in fact, moved forward. And what we've done - and the reason I wanted to look back at these moments - is what have been the moments where presidents have either been really right and led us forcefully and proactively? And what about the moments where they've been really wrong? And how did we overcome that?


Now that’s libtard history for you. First of all, Andrew Johnson was a man of his times, meaning the vast majority of Americans believed ex-slaves were incapable of self-government. Hell, there were blacks who acknowledged that they, in their present state of ignorance, had no understanding of Western civilization and the principles of our federalist system. Negro rule in South Carolina and Louisiana was a perfect example of what President Andrew Johnson, and others like him, feared.


However, I will say Presidents Johnson and Trump have a lot in common but not for the reasons Mr. Meacham spewed. What our glorified historian omitted is that both men had to deal with radicals in both Congress and their administrations. We all know what President Trump is going through; President Johnson dealt with something very similar.

The administrative state didn’t exist during the time of Reconstruction; instead, President Johnson had to deal with an overzealous Congress and their embeds in his cabinet. When the Radical Republicans forced the Reconstruction Acts along with the Tenure of Office Act over Johnson’s veto, he knew he had a battle on his hands especially after the 14th Amendment was forced upon the states. Here is an excerpt from Southern Reconstruction:


After the Fourteenth Amendment was submitted to the states for ratification in June, Johnson realized he was in a fight to the finish with Congress for control of Reconstruction. The next month, three of his cabinet members resigned because they declined to support his plan over the one emerging from Congress. Secretary of War Edwin Stanton felt the same way but remained in the cabinet to spy for the Republican Radicals and as their tool to implement congressional Reconstruction policies through the force of arms.


Consequently, Johnson decided to make his case to the public. Although not a common practice at the time , the president set out on a trip to visit every outside of New England. He pleaded his case in public speeches during August and September, before the autumn elections. Secretary of State William Seward, Navy Secretary Gideon Welles, and General Ulysses S. Grant Accompanied him.


I guess this is what Mr. Meacham means by self-absorbed and self-pitying speeches. God forbid a president takes his case to the American people.


The goal of the Radicals was to impose their will upon the Southern states by turning them into military districts. Secretary of War Stanton was to be the enforcer of these policies completely bypassing the commander-in-chief. Stanton’s duplicity can be traced to a race riot in New Orleans. Radicals back then, as they do today, had a high tolerance level for violence. Here is another excerpt from Southern Reconstruction:


The mayor of New Orleans asked the local military commander to intervene and block the convention to prevent violence. The commander wired Secretary Stanton for instructions, but Stanton did not reply. He failed to even mention the tense New Orleans situation to President Johnson. His silence on the matter, and similar duplicitous actions, eventually led Johnson to request the secretary’s resignation. Meanwhile, a New Orleans mob broke up the convention before military units arrived to end the violence. Thirty-four blacks and one white were killed.


The Tenure of Office Act was designed to trap President Johnson. One of the articles of impeachment was Johnson’s unauthorized firing of Stanton. This charge was completely unconstitutional and was recognized as such years later. Here is another excerpt from Southern Reconstruction:


Years later, when President Grover Cleveland questioned the Tenure Act’s legitimacy, it was repealed. If the Tenure Act had prevailed, the presidency could not have remained an independent branch of government. Those voting for acquittal realized that Congress was running amok, intimidating the executive, and increasingly, the judicial government branches. Some senators voting for conviction, including John Sherman and even Charles Sumner, later admitted they were wrong.


In 1926, almost sixty years after the Tenure Act was passed over Johnson’s veto, the Supreme Court ruled in a test case involving Woodrow Wilson’s removal of his postmaster general that a president had the right to remove cabinet members. Nine years later, it also ruled that Congress could limit a president’s power to remove other officers. The court never addressed the Tenure Act specifically.


I would say Presidents Trump and Johnson have a lot in common; just not in Jon Meacham’s historiography.


Source:


https://www.npr.org/2018/05/01/607303543/has-the-partisan-divide-ever-been-this-bad-author-jon-meacham-says-yes


https://www.amazon.com/Southern-Reconstruction-Philip-Leigh/dp/159416276X

Forgetting Auschwitz in a Brave Progressive World

Earlier this week, the Washington Examiner reported 66% of millennials and 41% of adults couldn’t explain the significance of Auschwitz. I was absolutely stunned when I read that article. My first thought was how is this possible? This was standard fare in our history curriculum. I was aware of the holocaust in middle school. However, I wasn’t taught the facts on how a vocal and violent minority was able to subjugate a whole country and use that power to commit the greatest atrocity known to mankind.


If I were teaching history, and allowed to demonstrate the Nazification of Germany, I would show two videos: The Nazi Gospels and Hitler’s Empire: The Post War Plan - Nazification. An astute student would recognize the tactics used by today’s Progressives are the same as Hitler’s Brown Shirts. It’s uncanny.


First on their agenda was to takeover schools and brainwash the youth. Children are susceptible to propaganda. They haven’t developed critical thinking skills and therefore are easy targets. The youth were moulded into believing they were special and destined to fix the wrongs of previous generations. Doesn’t that remind you of today’s snowflakes?


Another facet on brainwashing was to take children away from their parents and deny adoption. We see that today. Liberals have declared Christians as dangerous bigots and shouldn’t be allowed to foist their religion on future Americans. Bigotry is a one way street with these people.


A common factor between Hitler’s Germany and today’s Progressives is the marginalization of Christians. Any business or business owner who openly professes their love of Jesus is boycotted, harassed and/or sued. Recently, The New Yorker published an article about Chick-Fil-A’s “infiltration” of Gotham. The writer freaked out over that company’s Christian principles. A couple of decades ago this wouldn’t have been a problem.


This brings us to another favorite tactic employed by totalitarians: fear and denunciation. In the world of Progressives, as it was in 1930’s Germany, Mao’s China and Stalin’s Soviet Union, individualism is frowned upon. People are pigeonholed into subset groups and every aspect of life is politicized. We can’t even watch a football game, movie, television show or an awards ceremony without a bunch of punks shoving their cause de jour in our face. These self-righteous snowflakes have been well indoctrinated in progressive rhetoric; but to others, words just won’t do.


Shaming is the first step to subjugation; violence the second and nothing melds these two principles together like Antifa and groups like it. These fascists have really embraced the Nazi gospels by subscribing to thuggish tactics such as shutting down speech, beating dissenters, terrorizing venues, vandalizing businesses and statues. These snowflakes are convinced of their superior ideology with remarkable assurance. They, like their 20th century predecessors, are indoctrinated in the belief that they too will someday share in the power. But first, all dissenters must be cowed.


One of the ironies these doctrinaires haven’t contemplated is how their elite exempt themselves from the rigours of their own ideology. We see that with today’s environmentalist, politicians and celebrities who laud spartan-esque lifestyles while they enjoy private jets and energy consuming mansions. The Nazis did the exact same thing but through fashion.


A way to virtue signal the superiority of Germanic culture was to dress like peasants. These drab costumes were encouraged because 97% of women’s fashion were dominated by Jews. However, burlap sacks wouldn’t suffice for the upper-echelon. Their wives wanted to look good. So, they enslaved Jews at concentration camps, like Auschwitz, to make dresses especially for them.


As we’ve seen, history is inconsequential to Progressives. They subscribe to a Darwinian ideology that emphasizes an evolving and just society that defies human experience. The ends justify the means to this crowd and the consequences be damned, as though history doesn’t repeat itself.


I’m sure others were shocked to find out 66% of millennials do not understand the significance of Auschwitz; but should we be, after considering what we know about Progressives? In their brave new world we can only hope future generations are fit enough to survive this particular strand of superior ideology.

Source:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/66-percent-of-us-millennials-dont-know-what-auschwitz-was


https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/liberals-now-claim-christian-parents-are-dangerous.-this-is-an-existential


https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-gastronomy/chick-fil-as-creepy-infiltration-of-new-york-city

Republican Party Has a History of Internecine Warfare

The American people have come to the conclusion both political parties are D.C. centric.  Democrats have made it clear they’re for big, centralized government and their voters are okay with that. If anything, these Marxists are  angry this country hasn’t obtained a Venezuelan-esque paradise.

However, conservatives have had a rude awakening.  The Tea Party movement exposed the GOP for what it is, and it has nothing to do with limited government or the U.S. Constitution.  The Republican establishment thought they could exploit our movement; instead we exposed them.  Now we have internecine warfare where both factions are fighting for the soul of the party.

History has a way of putting things into perspective.  I’m currently reading Undaunted Radical: The Selected Writings and Speeches of Albion Tourgee. What an eye opener.  This book is a treasure trove for those seeking information on Reconstruction and its failures from the perspective of a Radical Republican.

Tourgee and his fellow travelers were exasperated by the failures of the Republican Party when it came to securing the rights and safety of freedmen and loyalists in the South.  Here is an excerpt from A Bystander’s Notes: The Afro-American League (1889):

The claim the Republican Party is all the organization the negro requires comes with very bad grace from the organs of a party which has shown itself thus far quite unable to deal  with the questions touching his rights as a man and a citizen - a party with the record of the inconsistency of 1876 upon its shoulders - an inconsistency so glaring that is seems impossible that any Northern Republican of average sensibility could ever ask a colored man to rely upon that party to remedy the evils which attach to his condition, at least until that crime against good faith and common sense has been retrieved.

The simple fact is the Republican Party is just like any other party.  It seeks success and, within limits, it advocates and does whatever its leaders and manipulators believe will secure success and avoids what they believe endanger the result.  This is the very highest merit of the party system, which progress yet devised for a self-governing people.  Strong, resolute, intense men, looking over the field of public sentiment, adjudge thus idea or that to be uppermost in the popular mind, and so order an advance along this or that portion of the line of policy the party occupies, and expect the rest without abandoning their position to remain comparatively quiet in any particular struggle.  It is for this reason that the Republican Party, after twenty-five years of aggressive movement along the line of individual right, thrust again to the front of the old Whig principle of protection and fought its battle almost solely on that issue.  It was not because it had not abandoned the principle of equal right and privilege, but because the leaders believed that success was more probable if the attack was made on another part of the line.  Many of its leaders, both during the campaign and since that time, have favored relegating the question of the rights of the colored man to the background.  They have “had enough of the nigger,” they say.

        

Dare I ask,  has today’s Republican establishment had enough of the Tea Party? I can most definitely say we’ve had enough of them.

Americans Need Nation-Wide Libtard Control

The ghouls just couldn’t wait.  The usual suspects wasted no time dancing around the dead in Las Vegas while singing their hymnals of gun control.  The priests and priestesses from the High Church of Libtard would have us believe guns are responsible for committing mass murder.  Their bumper sticker gospel may seduce the weak and stupid, however, we need to expose their religion.

I have a question.  What do all these mass murderers have in common besides shooting innocent people?  I’ll tell you.  Everyone of them are godless and evil.  They are nihilist who believe in nothing.  Had they respect for themselves and their fellow man, these atrocities wouldn’t have happened.

These kinds of mass murders hardly ever happened prior to the 90’s.  I can think of the Texas tower shooting in 1966 and that is it.  Prior to that, I can’t think of one.  This kind of evil is unique to our time.

Progressives say they want a conversation about the source of these atrocities.  Believe me, they want no part of that.  The simple fact is they’re afraid we might expose them as the source for all this evil and outright absurdity.  They’re afraid Americans will begin to wonder how we as people have forsaken our history and culture as a Christian nation.  If we truly were to have a conversation about the source for all this evil, the American people would demand nation-wide libtard control.

We need to emphasize the fact that progressives have successfully transformed our country into a godless hellhole.  They have taken Christ out of our schools and the public square.  They accomplished this by bastardizing our history, language and the Constitution itself.  Recently, Chuck Todd from Meet the Press, stated Judge Roy Moore doesn’t have a fundamental understanding of the First Amendment because he believes our rights come from God and not the federal government.  Chuck Todd is the one who doesn’t have a basic understanding of our Constitution.

Anyone who studies American history cannot detach the moorings of the Christian faith from its people. Progressives may have anesthetized a couple of generations from our birthright, but they cannot erase our past; it is there for the truth seeker.  For example, in 1890, a conference was held on the question of freedmen.  Judge Albion W. Tourgee, a radical Republican and ardent abolitionist, believed the United States was a Christian nation.  Here is what he had to say about the issues of his day:

God keeps account between nations and peoples as well as between man and man.  History is but a record of his judgement upon them.  The Negro is not only “here to stay,” but is here to offer the American Christian republic a chance to atone by justice in the future for the sin of the past, and thereby, escape the wrath of that God to whom a thousand years are but a day.  It is all very well to look to the future; but he who tries to separate it, from the past is as foolish as one who seeks to run away from his own shadow.  Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow are an eternal repetend.

And this from the same conference:

I trust I may be pardoned in advance if, in my remark, my religion and my politics should become not merely “mixed,” as Dr. [Lyman] Abbott feared that his might, but even if it should appear that my religion is mostly politics; for I trust it will also become apparent that my “politics” is not altogether at odds with what we term “religion.”  I confess I have never been able to distinguish between them.  Without religion, politics is simply a hot-bed of iniquity, the stamping-ground of devilish impulse; and, without politics, religion is as dead as “faith without works.”  When Christianity quits the field of political relation or politics discards the tenets of Christian philosophy, I have little use for either.

Progressives could use more Christian philosophy.  It’s disturbing when they refuse to show sympathy for those who were slain by a godless maniac.

Source:

https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/chuck-todd-is-a-constitutional-illiterate#undefined.uxfs

http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/02/democrats-immediately-call-for-gun-control-after-las-vegas-shooting/

http://freebeacon.com/culture/cbs-executive-fired-no-sympathy-comments-las-vegas-shooting/

Gov. Roy "Taliban" Cooper to Destroy Confederate Monuments

I remember when the Taliban destroyed a Buddhist monument in Afghanistan over a decade ago.  I was completely disgusted that anyone could have such a blatant disregard for antiquities and their country’s history.  I had the same guttural reaction last Monday when a band of socialist punks destroyed a Confederate statue in Durham, NC.  As far as I’m concerned, these people are of the same mentality.





Governor Roy Cooper is a fellow traveler.  He too would destroy our monuments and he does it by distorting our history.  Here is an excerpt from one of his missives:

Some people cling to the belief that the Civil War was fought over states’ rights. But history is not on their side. We cannot continue to glorify a war against the United States of America fought in the defense of slavery. These monuments should come down.

Our Civil War history is important, but it belongs in textbooks and museums — not a place of allegiance on our Capitol grounds. And our history must tell the full story, including the subjugation of humans created in God’s image to provide the back-breaking labor that drove the South’s agrarian economy

First of all, the vast majority of these monuments are commemorations to those who had fallen in that godforsaken war.  They were erected by a community who were mourning their dead.  They are not testaments to slavery.  Only an idiot would think otherwise.





Governor Cooper has demonstrated on multiple occasion his complete lack of historical knowledge.  Had he did a modicum of research, he would have known that about 78% of North Carolina’s population didn’t own slaves.  The majority were subsistence farmers.  They were breaking their own backs in the South’s agrarian economy.  The reason they fought was because of a Northern invasion, not to maintain the institution of slavery.  Hell, even the North denied they were fighting to abolish slavery.

Here is another gem from our illustrious governor:

 "My first responsibility as governor is to protect North Carolinians and keep them safe," Cooper said in an online post. "The likelihood of protesters being injured or worse as they may try to topple any one of the hundreds of monuments in our state concerns me. And the potential for those same white supremacist elements we saw in Charlottesville to swarm the site, weapons in hand, in retaliation is a threat to public safety."

May I remind the governor that he has a responsibility to protect public property and prosecute those who destroy it. We shouldn’t have to depend on fringe groups to protect our monuments.  I cannot believe we have this duffus as the head magistrate of our great state.

Source:

https://medium.com/@NC_Governor/north-carolina-monuments-b7ead3c471ee

http://www.wral.com/three-more-charged-in-durham-confederate-statue-vandalism/16884283/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/north-carolina-governor-roy-cooper-confederate-monuments-should-come-down/article/2631658

Socialist Revolutionaries Arrested in Durham, NC

North Carolina’s history was under assault last Monday when a group of snowflakes left their safe spaces and demolished a statue of a Confederate soldier in Durham.  These self-styled oppressed people rolled up to the monument in a Cadillac limousine with a ladder strapped to the the top of it.  Nothing says oppressed like a Cadillac limousine.

Dante Emmanuel Strobino, 35, and Ngoc Loan Tran, 24, both of Durham, were arrested at the Durham County Courthouse, where a woman who climbed the statue was making her first appearance after she was arrested Tuesday. Peter Hull Gilbert, 39, also of Durham, was arrested Wednesday afternoon.1

All three are charged with disorderly conduct by injury to a statue and damage to real property, which are both misdemeanors, and participation in a riot with property damage in excess of $1,500 and inciting others to riot where property damage exceeds $1,500, which are both felonies

A couple of these punks are members of the World Workers Party, which I assume is an offshoot of the defunct IWW.  Here is a quote from a wannabe revolutionary:

"There's revolutions taking place all across the country right now, and those revolutions won't be stopped," Thompson said after her court hearing.1

"We are following a historical legacy of standing up to the powers that be, to these racist, fascist systems, and we're on the right side of history," Tran said. "We're not going to let the police or this jail intimidate us.

  

These kids are profoundly stupid.  They are the ones who are acting like fascists and racists.  Maybe these punks should look into the fate of the Wobblies.  However, that would require opening a history book.

Source:

http://www.wral.com/three-more-charged-in-durham-confederate-statue-vandalism/16884283/

Progressive Tyranny Causes Another Great Awakening

A great awakening is happening.  Americans, who believe in our Constitution and a republican form of government, have come to the realization that our birthright has been stolen from us by generations of progressive revolutionaries hell bent on transforming this country into a socialist hellhole, or worse.

Most of us get up and go to work in order to provide for oneself and family. Few think about the machinations of a political and educational class conspiring against our liberties and federalist system.  For me, that ignorance ended with Washington D.C.’s hostile takeover of our healthcare system.  Who would’ve thought that bureaucrats in a distant capitol could have the power to force an American citizen to buy a product that doesn’t pertain to his wants or needs.  Worse, you can only buy that product within a designated time period.  That is about as un-American as you can get.

Ever since this hostile takeover, I’ve been on a mission to educate myself about progressives and the origins of this anti-American movement.  Mark Levin’s latest book, Rediscovering Americanism and the Tyranny of Progressives provides scholarship on the origins of this subversive ideology.  He’ll introduce you to the masterminds, philosopher kings and the politicians that renounced our founding principles for an administrative state whose sole mission is to obtain power and rule over us all.

It has come to the point that when I watch a documentary, I pay close attention to government policies of that period and its consequences.  The Smithsonian Channel produced a film about the Forbidden City.  The emperor who built his “heaven on earth” conscripted farmers throughout the kingdom and raised punitive taxes.  This had serious consequences.  A famine broke out and millions starved to death.

This same emperor only employed eunuchs to govern his kingdom.  These positions were highly sought after, and as you can expect,  the peasantry castrated their sons and sent them off to the Forbidden City in the hope he would obtain a position that would help the family survive their emperor’s cruel economic policies.  However, the unintended consequences produced an army of child eunuchs camped out in the front gates.  

Does anyone remember news stories about millennials wanting employment with the federal government instead of the private sector?  The federal government has been on a mission to castrate private industry.  Soon we’ll have a generation of economic eunuchs seeking employment with the federal government.  Can anyone say, Venezuela?  

  

I recently watched Ken Burn’s documentary on Prohibition.  Again, that was an eye opener.  The Anti-Saloon league and their fellow travelers in the temperance movement took over local school boards.  They produced textbooks that outright lied about alcohol and how it affected the body.  They stated one drink could destroy the lining of both esophagus and stomach.  These teetotalers were absolutely shameless in their indoctrination.  However, their efforts brought about the disastrous 18th Amendment.  It kind of reminds me of the man-made global warming fanatics that have taken over our modern day educational system.  To a progressive, no lie is too outrageous to advance an agenda.

These same teetotalers also had a complete disregard for the U.S. Constitution when it came to their issue.  After every census, congressional districts are reapportioned.  Progressives refused to comply because they would’ve lost political power to urban Americans who didn’t believe in Prohibition.  This is the only time in American history when congressional reapportionment didn’t take place.

I’ve always been somewhat of a history buff.  I can honestly say that I enjoy reading about great historical figures and events in world history, but I somewhat resent my scholarly pursuit of progressives and the era that has spawned today’s America.  I resent it, because I’m forced to confront a transformation of my country and what it means to be an American.  I am awake!  

Western Civilization Will Be the Next Tower of Babel

Once again, the religion of peace has treated Western civilization to another demonstration of love and understanding.  Last night, Londoners were attacked by a band of terrorists, who for some reason, have misinterpreted the prophet Muhammad’s message of tolerance and coexistence.  Oh that’s right, I forgot Islam means submit.  What am I thinking?  

All successful civilizations fall and ours is not immune.  A couple of years ago, I watched a documentary on the Tower of Babel.  David Rohl demonstrated that this tale could actually be true but not for the reasons told in the Bible.  The demise of this ancient culture is a well-worn truism of which we are witnessing today in Europe and the United States.

Secrets of the Bible: Season 1 Episode 11 - The... by ghazwanmattoka

What brought the downfall of this ancient civilization is a massive migration from lesser cultures.  These immigrants were attracted to the success and wealth of others.  Unfortunately, these foreigners refused to acculturate; hence, the many languages, and without a doubt, the concomitant hostilities that brought down a great city.

What happened to the citizens of this ancient civilization?  Well, like most people who’ve had their country invaded by hostile foreigners, they fled.  Recently, DNA test were performed on Egyptian mummies.  Those tests revealed that the subjects ancestors originated from Mesopotamia and the Anatolian Peninsula.  Could they be the descendents of Babel?  David Rohl seems to think so and it looks like he may be right.

The tale of the tower of Babel is as relevant today as it is ancient.  Rome fell because of a Germanic invasion that brought about the Dark Ages.  A third world invasion into Europe and the United States could bring another.  The multiculturalists and globalists who deny history are condemning us to repeat it.  


      

Source:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170530115141.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel