Monday, May 22, 2017

Draining the swamp is messy.

May 14, 2017
By Michael Master (author of Save America Now, Rules for Conservatives, The Birth Famine)

Our home is in a community of 2,000 homes located on the intercostal in North Carolina.   Everything lives here.   Alligators. Water moccasins.  Rattle snakes.  Sea hawks.  Egrets.  Giant blue heron.  Mosquitoes… blood sucking mosquitoes.  We’ve watched from our back porch as dolphins chased sail boats and motor boats up the intercostal and watched the moon rise over the ocean and cast its glow over the intercostal.  

When the community decided to drain the swamp in the center of the community, it was a big deal.   
Draining the swamp was messy.   The swamp was about 10 football fields, about 6 feet deep, with lots of creatures living in it.   It was a dangerous swamp.  Not one that you would walk  or swim.   You would not dare sit next to it in the dark of a moonless night.   If not the snakes, then the mosquitoes would eat you alive.  

As the water level decreased, the creatures were exposed.   As the water level disappeared, all that was left was 3 feet of yucky black mud and the roots to dying cypress trees.   The fish, snakes, frogs, rats, and birds were all stranded in the yucky mud.   
Those creatures of the swamp fought for their lives as the swamp disappeared.   The fish flopped around in the black mud looking for some water for life.   The frogs croaked incessantly all night while their young pollywogs were stranded  lifeless at the top of the black mud.   Snakes slithered in every direction in the black mud in search of food.   The rats that live in hollows all along the water abandoned their nests while the birds that feed off the swamp creatures also abandoned the area.   

Finally, the mud dried out.   No more snakes.  No more rats.  No more fish.   No more frogs.  No more mosquitoes.  And no more birds that feed off those creatures of the swamp.   
That same thing is happening to the political swamp in America.   Trump is draining the swamp.   His picks for his cabinet are all swamp drainers.   Yeah, 3 are from Goldman Sachs.  3 of 23.   Practically all of his cabinet have executive experience (military, or government, or private sector) .. and it is the executive branch, now isn't it?   

The mud is becoming visible as all the creatures who live in the swamp are fighting for their lives.   Government employees at the IRS, EPA, and Education are flapping in the mud like dying fish.   The lobbyists are slithering here and there looking for government funds like the snakes in the mud ... especially those who wrote Obamacare.  The liberal media cartel is chirping and croaking  all the time like frogs trying to reverse the draining.   The tax and spend politicians are dying off like the blood sucking mosquitoes.  The political appointees of Obama are fleeing DC for other jobs like the birds who lost their meal tickets.   And the information leakers like Comey and Lynch are looking for new places to nest like the rats that left the swamp.  Soon, all that will remain will be the dying institutions like public education as the dying cypress trees of our society.   
Everyone who lived off the swamp is praying for rain.   Election rain so Democrats might win some elections from Republicans since the Democrats suffered such horrible defeats during the 8 years of Obama.   Impeachment rain so the professional politicians can get rid of Trump as the swamp drainer.   Low approval rating rain so the media can claim they were correct about Trump.   Virtual rain, fake rain, so pundits can claim that Trump is not making any progress even though the results say the opposite.   

Draining the swamp is messy, muddy.   But the mud will soon dry.   Democrats just lost special elections in Arkansas and Omaha after sinking millions into them.  Democrats might grab an election here or there in places like Georgia where the demographics are changing to black communities, but not without millions and millions of campaign money ... and Democrats cannot afford to do that for all the elections in 2018.  Democrats must defend 23 Senators in 2018 as compared to 10 for Republicans and Democrats must win 25 seats in the US House from Republicans and then win back 900 state legislative seats and 14 governorships.  If Georgia is an example,  that will cost Democrats hundreds of millions to try.  
SCOTUS will be rendering its decisions about Trump executive orders just before the 2018 elections ... and more than likely, SCOTUS will rule against the Obama appointed judges who live in the lower court swamps.  SCOTUS will help Trump. 

Comey is gone.  Lynch is in trouble.   Clinton is back in trouble. The Clinton Foundation donors are talking.  Clapper and Yates both said that there is no evidence of collusion between Trump and the Russians. 
Schumer is gasping for rain like one of those stranded fish.  His Republican swamp buddies like McCain will abandon him as he dies … a rat leaving the swamp even though they shared an apartment together.   His Wall Street swamp buddies cannot help him.   The Washington Post and The New York Times and CNN and NBC are all trying to seed the clouds.  But none of it is producing enough rain to help Schumer stop Trump from draining the swamp.   

Draining the swamp is loud.  Listen to all the hysterical liberal media cartel who are trying to make it rain in order to save the swamp where they live.   Chanting.  Lies.  Rain dances.   But no real rain is coming.  Only fake rain.   The swamp will soon be dry.    And when it is, then the next task to make America great again can begin.   

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

New Study Shows Global Warming Nonexistent For Nearly Two Decades

While globalists have consistently bludgeoned us with doom and gloom predictions regarding so-called “global warming”, a new study could prove to be their worst nightmare.

Global warming, or the idea that man’s use of fossil fuels has contributed to an unprecedented heating of the entire globe, is a relatively new idea for scientists on the left.  As recently as the 1970’s, much of the scientific community was convinced that an increase of greenhouses gasses in Earth’s atmosphere would insulate the planet against the heat of the sun, thereby creating the opportunity for a mini ice age.  After this prophecy failed to unite global governments in a sovereignty-snatching liberty grab, leftists and globalists were forced to turn this theory on its head, instead claiming that the earth was actually heating up.
This 180 degree flip then allowed for all of the subsequent, invented doomsday scenarios to manifest.  Liberal politicians the world over began touting images of sad, emaciated polar bears clinging to small pieces of ice as proof-incarnate that the world was doomed to global warming-induced flooding as the ice caps melted.  It was just one piece of a global puzzle that would serve to unite the world under one global authority – something that the allow for a consolidation of power far above that of national governments.

Meanwhile, true science continued to debate this new, and liberally convenient, outlook on our global climate.  The culmination of decades of exhausting, unbiased work in the field of global climate science has now gifted us with one of the clearest pictures of our planet’s true environmental situation…and the globalists are not going to be happy.
“The Telegraph newspaper in the UK has published a fascinating article detailing data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI).

“‘Ever since December temperatures in the Arctic have consistently been lower than minus 20 C. In April the extent of Arctic sea ice was back to where it was in April 13 years ago. Furthermore, whereas in 2008 most of the ice was extremely thin, this year most has been at least two metres thick. The Greenland ice cap last winter increased in volume faster than at any time for years.’
“‘As for those record temperatures brought in 2016 by an exceptionally strong El Niño, the satellites now show that in recent months global temperatures have plummeted by more that 0.6 degrees: just as happened 17 years ago after a similarly strong El Niño had also made 1998 the “hottest year on record”.’

“‘This means the global temperature trend has now shown no further warming for 19 years. But the BBC won’t be telling us any of this. And we are still stuck with that insanely damaging Climate Change Act, which in this election will scarcely get a mention.’
“​The author then goes on to decry the very real consequences to businesses and citizens from governments continuing to enact ever more stringent regulation to offset this global ‘warming.’ But the real findings of the DMI are significant. The liberal media might take issue with a U.S. think tank funding a study that says global warming doesn’t exist — or at least hasn’t for 19 years — but they’ll accept the findings from little ol’ Denmark, won’t they?”

Once again, true, free science has indicated that the global warming hoax is simply a scam by overactive liberal imaginations.  Their phony, prophetic diatribes are nothing more than ghost stories that eco-terrorists and globalist henchmen tell their children in order to scare them into subservience.
Now, with this latest study coming into the limelight, perhaps we can finally destroy this blatantly bogus boogeyman once and for all.

by Andrew West - May 8, 2017

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

How Desert Storm Destroyed The Military.

The US military that won Desert Storm or Gulf War I in 1991 was a spectacular military, a gargantuan industrial age military with high tech weaponry and well trained personnel, that when called upon, achieved victory with the speed of Patton and the elan of Teddy Roosevelt.

Overlooking the vast eight mile carnage on the Highway of Death in Kuwait, destruction that was caused by a US Air Force and Navy that bore almost no resemblance to the two services now, a sergeant in the 7th US Cavalry remarked, “America sure got its money’s worth from those Joes.”
In 44 days, the largest military force assembled by the US and its allies since Normandy destroyed the world’s fourth largest army in a brilliantly led, fabulously executed air and ground war in the sands of the Middle East.

The ghosts of Vietnam were vanquished by men who had experienced the horrors and strategic errors of that war and who inculcated those lessons to the personnel they led.
Both General Colin Powell and the late General Norman Schwarzkopf had both served multiple tours in Vietnam and their experiences there made them highly skeptical of the press and its intentions.

Therefore, no reporters were embedded with combat units during the war.
The world was given a Nintendo video game, sanitized version of a war; while albeit short, had many elements of the nastiness of wars past, but appeared to be nothing more than a high tech cake walk.

Because there were no journalists in the field, the world never saw H.R McMaster, the President’s National Security Adviser, who was then a captain in the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, fighting the Tawakalna Division of the Republican Guard at a now famous grid line dubbed the 73 Easting.
On McMaster’s left flank, the scouts from the 4th Squadron, 7th Cavalry were also battling the Tawakalna and the ghosts of the Little Big Horn, at a nameless speck of desert landscape known as Phase Line Bullet.

Later that night, grunts and tankers from the 1st Infantry Division, the Big Red One, hit the Guard at Objective Norfolk and before the night was over, found themselves engaged in close quarters fighting with fanatical Guardsmen in a place most of them want to forget, but can’t. Two days before, the Big Red One had spent the opening hours of the war burying Iraqis in the trenches alive with bulldozers.
On G Day +3, the US 1st Armored Division hammered the Iraqi Al-Medina Division of the Republican Guard at a place now known as Medina Ridge. The Battle of Medina Ridge was to date the largest tank battle since Kursk in 1943.

Yet, the world saw none of those battles being fought as they saw no Marines storming through Kuwait. There were no journalists; hence no video, no film, no photos; nothing to show the world except a few shots of B Roll of the Iraqi Army surrendering to Marines on the border. To the American public, the Iraqis were surrendering en masse, when in actuality the Republican Guard was going down with the ship. For example, the 10,000 man Tawakalna Division was virtually annihilated, including the division commander who died in an artillery barrage on the night of February 26, 1991.
While General Schwarkopf’s power point presentations enlightened the world, the soldiers and Marines found themselves in a Dante’s Inferno, with smoldering vehicles, dead Iraqi soldiers strewn over tank turrets in a man-made darkness of oil fires that smothered any sunlight and the vast remnants of an army, which littered the battlefield: rifles, helmets, sundry equipment and arms and legs that were picked at by packs of roving wild dogs.

War is hell…but the American public never knew.
The day Desert Storm ended, the death of the US military commenced.

The Pentagon, basking in glory and bowing to pressure from the public and crackpot feminists like Patricia Schroeder, started drinking the Kool Aid and they’ve never stopped. The war was a video game, a clean, quick rout. Modern war was now sanitized, where the bad guys would die at stand-off ranges of a mile or two and explode in little black and white pixels on Pentagon TV screens. In fact, war was now so quick and so easy that women should be allowed to serve in the combat arms and Special Forces.
Our victory in Desert Storm became the catalyst for every left wing wacko to hack at the military with a meat cleaver.

Since, 1991, the US military has been slowly coming apart at the seams. Stress cards, open homosexuality, transgenders on active duty, sensitivity training, pregnancy simulators for male troopers, lactation stations in the field, babies born on US ships of war, female graduates of Ranger School, including a 37 year old mother (it’s funny how the women looked so well fed), women in the SEALs, women in Marine infantry units and females in the field artillery (even though most cannot carry a 155mm round) are just some of the insanity that has taken place in the last 26 years, but which snowballed into hell under the Obama administration.
A social revolution engulfed the military, starting with Tailhook and continuing to this day. Warriors were forced out and feather merchants and PC flag bearers were promoted. Girl power was in and masculinity was out. The warrior culture was buried and a new culture was reborn that resembles corporate America, not the US military of yesteryear.

No, General Kennedy, it’s not your father’s army and that’s a problem, a big, festering problem.
And, now, with the world in flames, with ISIS blowing up Europe, with Putin pumping weights in the Artic while he watches his BMP’s on skis roll by, with Kim Jong-Loon on the loose with a toy chest of nukes and missiles and with Iran figuring out that Trump ain’t Barney Fife, the US military needs to be rougher and tougher and more ready for a fight than ever.

And, we ain’t. And, that’s the fact, Jack.
Many are waiting for Mad Dog Mattis to stick a pike in the heart of the military’s social engineering forever.

We are still waiting…
Perhaps, Secretary Mattis is so busy dealing with the thugs on the planet, that he has forgotten that the armed forces that will be engaging the thugs is still in trouble.

Secretary Mattis must once and for all shut down the feminist fantasy of women in the combat arms.  There are thousands of jobs for women in the military where they can serve honorably and be promoted, without, in Mattis’ own words, ‘setting themselves up for failure in combat.’
Mattis also needs to get rid of the perfumed princes, and the feckless duds who have infested the senior ranks of the armed forces. I would rather have a sergeant with guts running a division than a two star coward who is more worried about his pension and future job on cable news than the mission and the troops.

The US military is still being led by people who believe that the military is nothing different than working for Google, except that the military has uniforms and weapons.  When you eschew the glorious traditions of the military and combine that with ludicrous social engineering, you are setting yourself up for massive failure.
While the US military interpreted the results of Desert Storm incorrectly, the real lessons from that conflict are crystal clear. The US military functioned well in an environment that focused on the mission, not on political correctness, LGBT rights, day care centers on submarines and breastfeeding Rangers.

With our enemies stacking up against us, time is running out to fix the problems which were initially caused by a victory 26 years ago, in a war that has largely been forgotten.
by Ray Starmann | April 21, 2017

Thank you, Ralph H.

Starmann, with credibility I do not have, puts into perspective issues I've asked questions about since Desert Storm, some I've left to you, Dan and others for expert commentary. In large part because Desert Storm was so successful (to my eyes anyway) I was, soon on, disgusted with both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. You know my concern that goes so far as to ask "can we win another major conflict?" And, I know your answer. I've talked with a former CENTCOM Commander for his opinion of the two wars and his answer was, "the worst managed wars in history." OK, I don't think Gen. Tony Zinni would object if he knew I was repeating his words.

Women in combat is another issue. I get worse than anger from more than a few women when they know I don't support putting women in combat. Is it possible that Gen. Mattis and Pres. Trump can stop the madness in our military, including stopping the damn fool social re-engineering!   Can they overcome the disastrous effects of the Obama years and of congressional neglect??  Still have more questions than answers.

Perhaps you and others here can help me reconcile our needs that the ignorant and feckless "leaders" seem neither to understand nor want to. Sorry, my hot button got ignited. I don't have the military creds to trust my own opinions,  but it seems that today even top senior officers are more interested in politics than in fighting to win.


Joe M.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Facebook's Grip On Modern Culture

Facebook’s grip on modern culture has transformed into something much bigger than mere words on the personal pages of the world’s technologically savvy denizens.

The enormity of the Facebook experiment comes with it a responsibility to represent the entirety of its user base – a responsibility that Facebook has concisely shirked in favor of a severe liberal slant.  CEO Mark Zuckerberg has taken the false flag information attack aimed at “fake news” and co-opted the moniker to censor and stifle those with whom his personal politics disagree.
This would be nothing of note were Zuckerberg in charge of a small media outlet with a staff of content creators, working feverishly to spin the world news to fit into this view.  Instead, the Facebook CEO is at the helm of one of the world’s most diverse and complex populations and publishing outlets, and he is simply censoring those with whom he disagrees.

Now, given the rise of conservatism across the globe, Facebook is turning their fascist-tendencies up to eleven in an effort to maintain the liberal status quo.  In France, where an extremely important election is looming, Zuckerberg has just fired a salvo of shots aimed directly at right-wing candidate Marine Le Pen.
“Facebook says it has targeted 30,000 fake accounts linked to France ahead of the country’s presidential election, as part of a worldwide effort against misinformation.

“The company said Thursday it’s trying to ‘reduce the spread of material generated through inauthentic activity, including spam, misinformation, or other deceptive content that is often shared by creators of fake accounts.’
“It said its efforts ‘enabled us to take action’ against the French accounts and that it is removing sites with the highest traffic.”

We must remember that, although these statements from Facebook appear benign and benevolent on their face, the word “fake” is doublespeak for “conservative” in the Kingdom of Zuckerberg.  What is happening in France is simply a refusal by the world’s most prevalent publisher of opinion to allow any conservative viewpoints to be heard in hopes of dashing the French people’s hopes of electing the enigmatic Le Pen to office.

This is ironically a case of pure and simple fascism:  A term used ad nauseam by the mainstream media’s figureheads to attempt to vilify the right wing movement that is sweeping our globe.


Friday, April 7, 2017

Questions For Susan Rice

By David Harsanyi
April 07 2017

The House Intelligence Committee reportedly wants former national security adviser Susan Rice to testify in the probe of alleged Russian election interference, which now includes evidence that Obama officials may have improperly used intelligence gathered on President Trump's transition team.
We've been incessantly assured there's nothing to this story. Perhaps. This week, though, Rice felt the need to seek out a friendly face in NBC's Andrea Mitchell — although there were plenty to choose from — to tell us that she never improperly unmasked any Trump transition officials whose conversations were caught on surveillance.
Now, there are a number of worthy follow-ups that Mitchell forgot to ask. But since Rice says nothing unethical transpired, there should be no problem in her answering those queries under oath.
For instance: Why did you lie to PBS about having no knowledge of the unmasking of Trump officials or family?
On the heels of the allegations made by Rep. Devin Nunes, Rice was asked whether the Obama administration had unmasked Trump transition members swept up in surveillance of other individuals. "I know nothing about this," she claimed at the time. "I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today." She didn't say "so much of this is routine, I'm unsure" or "it would be completely inappropriate for me to talk about intelligence reports." She said, "I know nothing" and "I was surprised."
After retweeting an ally who claimed Rice's words were distorted, Rice wrote, "I said I did not know what reports Nunes was referring to when he spoke to the press."
The transcript says otherwise. Judy Woodruff correctly and broadly laid out the situation, and then asked a straightforward question. She said: "We've been following a disclosure by ... Devin Nunes that in essence, during the final days of the Obama administration, during the transition after President Trump had been elected, he and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals and that their identities may have been disclosed. Do you know anything about this?"
Rice replied, "I know nothing about this."
What are the chances that a national security adviser forgot she's asked for intelligence reports on members of the incoming administration? This is the same woman who went on national television and repeatedly lied that the Islamic terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi were a "spontaneous reaction" to a "hateful and offensive video."
So, Ambassador Rice, did you request that the identities of Trump campaign officials, transition team members, or family members be unmasked?
Is it normal for high-level officials to request for names of political players to be unmasked in raw intelligence?
Ben Rhodes, one of the most frazzled former Obama officials on social media these days, tweeted yesterday, "Bullying people into covering routine work of any senior nat sec official as news is clear effort to distract from Qs about Trump and Russia."
Is it really the "routine work" of top national security officials to proactively collect information on incoming officials of the opposition political party? Sounds like a bad idea. Is this something Rhodes endorses for Trump officials as well? Is it OK to share this information with chief White House strategist Steve Bannon?
Because Bloomberg's Eli Lake reported this week that Rice allegedly "requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign." It was not something that was plopped on her desk by some functionary — incidentally.
Which individual in government initially provided you with the raw intelligence reports containing the masked Trump team identities?
Which Trump team members did you specifically ask to be unmasked? And why did you ask for their identities to be unmasked?
In what way did unmasking these people have foreign intelligence value?
In what way was this done to protect the American people?
If Nunes is telling the truth — and despite a widespread effort to make him look like a liar, he's been right so far — then this incidental collection had nothing to do with Russian collusion charges. Why has the media shown such little curiosity about the subject manner of the collection?
Yes, reporters, we know that "unmasking" is legal. So is meeting with a Russian ambassador during a campaign. And no, it does not vindicate Trump's tweet. Stressing the legality of the unmasking is a way to distract from the real questions: Did Rice abuse her power? Who did she share it with? Why? Did those people then leak the information for political purposes? That is illegal.
Rice says she gave "nothing to nobody."
Ambassador Rice, do you swear under oath that you have never leaked any classified information to anyone in the media ever?
Did you share the information you garnered about the Trump transition team with anybody, whether inside or outside the federal government?
Did anybody ask you to collect the unmasked information or to disseminate it?
After all, erstwhile civil libertarians have been warning about the potential for this sort of abuse for many years. Now, this isn't exactly how they imagined it unfolding, of course, but it doesn't make the charges any less serious.