by Al Benson Jr.
Awhile back, I received an email from a conservative activist who was busily urging people to try to get the Republican Party "back to its conservative roots." My initial thought was--what conservative roots? Anyone who had done any research as to the origins of the Republican Party and is not wearing blinders has got to realize that the Republican Party in this country had radical, leftist beginnings, hardly to be considered conservative by any stretch of the imagination.
Back in early 2008, author, columnist and researcher Alan Stang (since deceased) did a review of Donnie Kennedy's and my book Lincoln's Marxists. The title of his article was The Republican Party--Red From the Start. I thought his title was quite appropriate. My Stang understood what many conservatives do not seem to grasp, that the Republican Party was really leftist in its origins. While I sincerely appreciate the sincerity and intent of many conservatives, I feel they have got to begin to do the homework and wake up and realize what the Republican Party really is.
For years I've been getting mail urging me to vote Republican so as to fight against the "liberal Democrats." The people that promote and send this stuff out must think we are all stupid enough to actually think that all Republicans are conservative and all Democrats are liberal. What about fighting against liberal Republicans that are really no different than liberal Democrats? Ahh, we aren't even supposed to know enough to ask that question, are we?
So let's take a brief look at the "conservative" roots of the Republican Party. When the Republican Party ran its first presidential candidate, John C. Fremont, back in 1856, Fremont had the backing of several men who were socialist refugees from the failed socialist/communist revolts in Europe in 1848; (they were known as "Forty-Eighters). One of the most well known of these was Friedrich Hassaurek, an Austrian socialist, who stumped the Midwest in Fremont's behalf. It did little good at that point, as Fremont was beaten. However, it is worth noting that when the War (of Northern Aggression) broke out in 1861, General Fremont ended up with a goodly number of these Forty-Eighter socialists and communists on his military staff while the war was in progress. The Forty-Eighter socialists seem to have flocked to Fremont. What did they know about the august General that our "history" books have not bothered to reveal to us?
Although Fremont was beaten in 1856, the socialists and communists were nothing if not patient. In 1860 they found another candidate worthy of their leftist support--Abraham Lincoln. So, in the presidential campaign of 1860, the Forty-Eighters all came out for Lincoln. Carl Wittke, author of Refugees of Revolution noted that: "Lincoln was fully aware of the political influence of the Forty-Eighters in the campaign of 1860, in persuading many of their countrymen to desert the Democratic allegiance for the Republicans..." It appears that the Forty-Eighters had quite a bit of influence in the Republican Convention in 1860--even helping to write parts of the party's platform. So much for "conservatism" at the Republican roots!
Establishment historian, James McPherson, told us in his book Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution that Mr. Lincoln had championed the cause of the socialists and communists in Europe in 1848. You can find the quote about that on pages 24 and 25 of McPherson's book. So why, then, would Lincoln not embrace their unstinting support for his presidential aspirations in 1860? One can, quite accurately, label this whole scenario The Red Roots of the Republican Party.
If socialists and communists supported Fremont in 1856 and Lincoln in 1860 and 1864, we can hardly label the beginnings of the Republican Party as "conservative" now, can we? The roots of the Republican Party were anything but conservative. At best, they might be considered deep pink. Our decent, patriotic folks in this country need to start becoming aware of this so they will not be guilty of trying to take us back to Republican "conservative" roots that do not, and never did, exist.
It is true that the Republican Party did take a more conservative tack in the late 1940s and 50s, and even through the early 60s, but only out of political necessity; it hardly reflects the foundation and origins of the GOP.
It is worth noting that, in 1860, the Democrats were the real conservatives, while the Republicans were the left-leaning radicals. People today should know the difference--and the real history. The fact that most don't, reveals the lack of depth in what most of us received in government schools that passed for education. Sadly, what most of us received was little more than leftist propaganda.
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Political Liars Abound. So Do Their Omissions.
by Al Benson Jr.
Years ago I can remember hearing a rather sickening radio commercial that informed the public that "inflation is really all their fault." After laying his little guilt trip on an unsuspecting public the speaker proceeded to tell them how they could redeem themselves and thus be purged of the gross sin of "inflationary living." What they needed to do, immediately if not sooner, is to sit down at the kitchen table, write to some address in Pueblo, Colorado and send for this booklet that would tell them how to stop contributing to the nation's inflation rate. If the whole thing had not been such total hogwash it might almost have been laughable. As it was, the commercial stood as a classic piece of misinformation!
For years various government "economists" (who were mostly socialists) and other "experts" have sought to fill our heads with the rubbish that inflation is our fault because "we are all too greedy." In other words, if a man works overtime on Saturdays or evenings to help feed his family, then he's greedy. The fact that he may need the extra income to help put food on the table or pay his utility bills is not worth mentioning. Just remind him that he's contributing to inflation by working all those extra hours. So all of you all out there that have worked extra hours over the years to help provide your families with more than just the bare necessities had better quit that extra job. Learn to be satisfied with the bare minimum and just watch that inflation rate plummet! So said the government "experts" years ago. Now, we have an economy that our Exalted Ruler tells us is really booming, and he tells us how much he loves the middle class (just a slight prevarication there). Lots of folks can't get work, or if they do get it, it's part time and not full time, and the inflation rate, thanks to his reckless borrowing for his "stimulus packages" has gone through the roof. I haven't seen too many commercials of late telling the public that they are the main problem when it comes to inflation, probably because after six years of the "Great One" being in the White House, anyone who dared to put out such a commercial would be stoned. But they find other ways to lie to us. They continue to spit in our faces and tell us that it's dew.
What the monetary "experts" have been expert at NOT telling us is that, in reality, it is not those of us who work for a living that cause inflation. Rather it is our unsound and ungodly money system, operated not for the public good, but rather operated for the tax free profit of the bankers that control the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, that is the real culprit.
Indeed, the highly questionable odor of Federal Reserve practices became so obnoxious several years ago that the Committee on Banking and Currency in the House of Representatives even held hearings on the situation. Dr. Russell Lee Norburn, testifying before the Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, stated the following: "The result of 50 years shows that our present monetary system is merely a finesse for perpetuating financiers dedicated to maintaining the status quo instead of the public good." In plain language that meant that the Fed bankers couldn't have cared less about what happened to you or the country as long as they got their financial pound of flesh! Dr. Norburn told people that Federal Reserve manipulation of gold, bank credit, and Federal Reserve notes had resulted in gigantic exploitation of both government and people. In other word, folks, we've been had.
With no fast standard of gold or silver to stand in back of the debt-notes we've been conditioned to call money, the bankers can have a field day and you know by now who pays for it all--you do, you lucky stiff! This is the kind of information that Ron Paul tried for decades to get out to people and it's why he so strongly sought to have the Fed audited. Whether many agree or disagree with some of what he did, he understood the bankers and what they were doing to us and the country, and when he ran for president, the ruling elite in both parties who play footsie with the bankers had to make sure he never got close to the White House even though he did have a legitimate chance, had not his own party leadership played the part of the Judas Goat.
Gold and silver are real money. Paper is not. A return to currency redeemable in gold or silver is the very least we should do--but don't hold your breath. Supposedly now that the Republicans have taken back Congress, conservatism will rule. This ruse will fool lots of people and they will go back to sleep, but don't let it fool you. Nothing has changed except the name of the party supposedly running things, and seeing that the Council on Foreign Relations has its tentacles strongly into both parties, nothing will change unless they, for some reason, want it to.
In regard to all this, it would be interesting to see what some of your kids have for economics books in public schools. I'd be willing to be they parrot the "party line" rather than giving the kids any real truth.
Years ago I can remember hearing a rather sickening radio commercial that informed the public that "inflation is really all their fault." After laying his little guilt trip on an unsuspecting public the speaker proceeded to tell them how they could redeem themselves and thus be purged of the gross sin of "inflationary living." What they needed to do, immediately if not sooner, is to sit down at the kitchen table, write to some address in Pueblo, Colorado and send for this booklet that would tell them how to stop contributing to the nation's inflation rate. If the whole thing had not been such total hogwash it might almost have been laughable. As it was, the commercial stood as a classic piece of misinformation!
For years various government "economists" (who were mostly socialists) and other "experts" have sought to fill our heads with the rubbish that inflation is our fault because "we are all too greedy." In other words, if a man works overtime on Saturdays or evenings to help feed his family, then he's greedy. The fact that he may need the extra income to help put food on the table or pay his utility bills is not worth mentioning. Just remind him that he's contributing to inflation by working all those extra hours. So all of you all out there that have worked extra hours over the years to help provide your families with more than just the bare necessities had better quit that extra job. Learn to be satisfied with the bare minimum and just watch that inflation rate plummet! So said the government "experts" years ago. Now, we have an economy that our Exalted Ruler tells us is really booming, and he tells us how much he loves the middle class (just a slight prevarication there). Lots of folks can't get work, or if they do get it, it's part time and not full time, and the inflation rate, thanks to his reckless borrowing for his "stimulus packages" has gone through the roof. I haven't seen too many commercials of late telling the public that they are the main problem when it comes to inflation, probably because after six years of the "Great One" being in the White House, anyone who dared to put out such a commercial would be stoned. But they find other ways to lie to us. They continue to spit in our faces and tell us that it's dew.
What the monetary "experts" have been expert at NOT telling us is that, in reality, it is not those of us who work for a living that cause inflation. Rather it is our unsound and ungodly money system, operated not for the public good, but rather operated for the tax free profit of the bankers that control the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, that is the real culprit.
Indeed, the highly questionable odor of Federal Reserve practices became so obnoxious several years ago that the Committee on Banking and Currency in the House of Representatives even held hearings on the situation. Dr. Russell Lee Norburn, testifying before the Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, stated the following: "The result of 50 years shows that our present monetary system is merely a finesse for perpetuating financiers dedicated to maintaining the status quo instead of the public good." In plain language that meant that the Fed bankers couldn't have cared less about what happened to you or the country as long as they got their financial pound of flesh! Dr. Norburn told people that Federal Reserve manipulation of gold, bank credit, and Federal Reserve notes had resulted in gigantic exploitation of both government and people. In other word, folks, we've been had.
With no fast standard of gold or silver to stand in back of the debt-notes we've been conditioned to call money, the bankers can have a field day and you know by now who pays for it all--you do, you lucky stiff! This is the kind of information that Ron Paul tried for decades to get out to people and it's why he so strongly sought to have the Fed audited. Whether many agree or disagree with some of what he did, he understood the bankers and what they were doing to us and the country, and when he ran for president, the ruling elite in both parties who play footsie with the bankers had to make sure he never got close to the White House even though he did have a legitimate chance, had not his own party leadership played the part of the Judas Goat.
Gold and silver are real money. Paper is not. A return to currency redeemable in gold or silver is the very least we should do--but don't hold your breath. Supposedly now that the Republicans have taken back Congress, conservatism will rule. This ruse will fool lots of people and they will go back to sleep, but don't let it fool you. Nothing has changed except the name of the party supposedly running things, and seeing that the Council on Foreign Relations has its tentacles strongly into both parties, nothing will change unless they, for some reason, want it to.
In regard to all this, it would be interesting to see what some of your kids have for economics books in public schools. I'd be willing to be they parrot the "party line" rather than giving the kids any real truth.
Thursday, December 11, 2014
Christians--Some Forgotten Truth
by Al Benson Jr.
In the 6th chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians, verses 15 and 16, Paul states: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God."
Many in our day have struggled over what this passage means. Many think this can only refer to national Israel, who, we have been informed for many generations, are the "chosen people." Those who have read the old Scofield Bible and searched for Scofield's comments on this passage in his running commentary will be disappointed as I was. They will find no commentary from Mr. Scofield. He chose not to comment on these words.
While I am far from being an avid fan of Bible commentaries, especially those published in the 20th century, I do have a set of Matthew Henry's commentaries that was given to me as a gift. Henry, writing in a saner day than ours, theologically speaking, had no trouble with this passage. In fact, his comments, in light of much of what we read today, are quite enlightening.
In speaking of the peace and mercy mentioned in verse 16, Henry stated: "These, he declares, shall be the portion of all the Israel of God, by whom he means all sincere Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, all who are Israelites indeed, who, although they may not be the natural, yet are become the spiritual seed of Abraham; these being heirs of his faith, are also heirs together with him of the same promise, and consequently entitled to the peace and mercy here spoken of."
If Matthew Henry could see the plan truth of this passage of Scripture, why can so many Christians today not see it? It was no secret in Matthew Henry's day that all who trust in Christ Jesus for their salvation constitute the Israel of God. How, then, in our supposedly advanced age, can so many have forgotten such an essential truth?
Abraham's true descendants have always been only those who were of faith. The name "Israel" unfortunately has many meanings for many people today. Sadly, most of those to whom the name really belongs have unconsciously passed along their birthright to others who are not currently believers and have become willing to settle for being nothing more than a parenthesis in history. They have forgotten, or been led to forget, that all history revolves around God's true Israel, those who are in Christ.
The world will ultimately not be judged by how it responds to natural Israel in the Middle East, but by how it responds to the true Israel--Christ's Church. God has never had two "chosen people", one earthly and the other heavenly. From the start, God's chosen people have been those who have responded to Him in faith (Galatians 3:29).
Think about this, and ask the Holy Spirit to give you insight and discernment that you may know the truth. It is in knowing the truth that you will be set free.
In the 6th chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians, verses 15 and 16, Paul states: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God."
Many in our day have struggled over what this passage means. Many think this can only refer to national Israel, who, we have been informed for many generations, are the "chosen people." Those who have read the old Scofield Bible and searched for Scofield's comments on this passage in his running commentary will be disappointed as I was. They will find no commentary from Mr. Scofield. He chose not to comment on these words.
While I am far from being an avid fan of Bible commentaries, especially those published in the 20th century, I do have a set of Matthew Henry's commentaries that was given to me as a gift. Henry, writing in a saner day than ours, theologically speaking, had no trouble with this passage. In fact, his comments, in light of much of what we read today, are quite enlightening.
In speaking of the peace and mercy mentioned in verse 16, Henry stated: "These, he declares, shall be the portion of all the Israel of God, by whom he means all sincere Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, all who are Israelites indeed, who, although they may not be the natural, yet are become the spiritual seed of Abraham; these being heirs of his faith, are also heirs together with him of the same promise, and consequently entitled to the peace and mercy here spoken of."
If Matthew Henry could see the plan truth of this passage of Scripture, why can so many Christians today not see it? It was no secret in Matthew Henry's day that all who trust in Christ Jesus for their salvation constitute the Israel of God. How, then, in our supposedly advanced age, can so many have forgotten such an essential truth?
Abraham's true descendants have always been only those who were of faith. The name "Israel" unfortunately has many meanings for many people today. Sadly, most of those to whom the name really belongs have unconsciously passed along their birthright to others who are not currently believers and have become willing to settle for being nothing more than a parenthesis in history. They have forgotten, or been led to forget, that all history revolves around God's true Israel, those who are in Christ.
The world will ultimately not be judged by how it responds to natural Israel in the Middle East, but by how it responds to the true Israel--Christ's Church. God has never had two "chosen people", one earthly and the other heavenly. From the start, God's chosen people have been those who have responded to Him in faith (Galatians 3:29).
Think about this, and ask the Holy Spirit to give you insight and discernment that you may know the truth. It is in knowing the truth that you will be set free.
Monday, December 08, 2014
The Gift of Christian Resistance
by Al Benson Jr.
As we enter the Advent Season of the Christian year we look forward to the Christmas Season which commemorates the birth of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. We look upon this historic event as God's precious gift to His elect people, His new Israel. It is this gift that Christmas is really all about. Jesus Christ came to die and to rise again to procure salvation for all His people, Jews and Gentiles alike.
As this Christmas Season approaches we observe the world situation, and to those without Christ it is a hopeless one indeed. And even in the Church, we observe the retreatist attitudes of many. Rather than do battle with the world, the flesh, and the devil, many Christians seek to retreat within the four walls of their church building and to shut the world out, to have no dealings "out there" and therefore, to effect no cultural changes out there. I have wondered, over several Christmas Seasons if the best gift the Church might give the world at the Christmas Season is the gift of Christian resistance.
Should not we, as Christians, seek to resist the present (One) World System with all its evil machinations? Are we to fear the world and its anti-Christ conspiracies? NO! But we should resist and expose them (Ephesians 5:11).
If we will only take our heads out of the spiritual sand we cannot help but take note of the blatantly anti-Christian trends in government, education, economics, the media, and in a score of other areas we could name. Why not the gift of Christian resistance to anti-Christian forces in all areas of life? Are we supposed to contend for the culture around us or just to surrender to it? Many Christians would claim that all we will ever be is a "counter-culture" and that we better be satisfied with that. We have inherited a lot of retreatist attitudes from the early promoters of the Darby-Scofield school of retreatism, so much so that we need to overcome that and find anew that strong strain of godly Christian resistance so prevalent in the Protestant Reformation.
Let Christian again stand up and RESIST anti-Christian governments, anti-Christian educational systems, ungodly money systems, etc.
So, as Christ brought to us the free gift of salvation, let us also bring the Good News of that event to others as He leads us to do so. And let us also seek to give to the world the precious gift of Christian resistance to what is ungodly. Let us, as the Lord leads, learn to "fight the good fight of faith" and let us learn to "resist the devil" in ALL areas of life. Our Lord did not tell us to retreat until He came; He told us to OCCUPY until He returned. If Jesus made a whip of cords and drove the money changers from the temple, can we do less today? Unfortunately, for many Christians today the answer to that question is "yes--lots less."
It is high time for Christians to stop retreating and to start resisting. Think about that as this Christmas Season approaches.
As we enter the Advent Season of the Christian year we look forward to the Christmas Season which commemorates the birth of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. We look upon this historic event as God's precious gift to His elect people, His new Israel. It is this gift that Christmas is really all about. Jesus Christ came to die and to rise again to procure salvation for all His people, Jews and Gentiles alike.
As this Christmas Season approaches we observe the world situation, and to those without Christ it is a hopeless one indeed. And even in the Church, we observe the retreatist attitudes of many. Rather than do battle with the world, the flesh, and the devil, many Christians seek to retreat within the four walls of their church building and to shut the world out, to have no dealings "out there" and therefore, to effect no cultural changes out there. I have wondered, over several Christmas Seasons if the best gift the Church might give the world at the Christmas Season is the gift of Christian resistance.
Should not we, as Christians, seek to resist the present (One) World System with all its evil machinations? Are we to fear the world and its anti-Christ conspiracies? NO! But we should resist and expose them (Ephesians 5:11).
If we will only take our heads out of the spiritual sand we cannot help but take note of the blatantly anti-Christian trends in government, education, economics, the media, and in a score of other areas we could name. Why not the gift of Christian resistance to anti-Christian forces in all areas of life? Are we supposed to contend for the culture around us or just to surrender to it? Many Christians would claim that all we will ever be is a "counter-culture" and that we better be satisfied with that. We have inherited a lot of retreatist attitudes from the early promoters of the Darby-Scofield school of retreatism, so much so that we need to overcome that and find anew that strong strain of godly Christian resistance so prevalent in the Protestant Reformation.
Let Christian again stand up and RESIST anti-Christian governments, anti-Christian educational systems, ungodly money systems, etc.
So, as Christ brought to us the free gift of salvation, let us also bring the Good News of that event to others as He leads us to do so. And let us also seek to give to the world the precious gift of Christian resistance to what is ungodly. Let us, as the Lord leads, learn to "fight the good fight of faith" and let us learn to "resist the devil" in ALL areas of life. Our Lord did not tell us to retreat until He came; He told us to OCCUPY until He returned. If Jesus made a whip of cords and drove the money changers from the temple, can we do less today? Unfortunately, for many Christians today the answer to that question is "yes--lots less."
It is high time for Christians to stop retreating and to start resisting. Think about that as this Christmas Season approaches.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
For Real "Freedom" Let Government Regulate the Internet
by Al Benson Jr.
Now that the Republicans have taken the Senate it almost seems as if Comrade Obama is in overdrive, trying to accomplish as much of his socialist agenda as possible before the end of the year. And even though many in the Republican-controlled Congress will always be soft of socialism and collectivism he can't be sure enough will be so that his socialist schemes, which he characterizes as "legislation" will always be veto-proof.
That's why he is in such a huff to issue executive orders making millions of illegal immigrants legal before Comrade Reid vacates the senate. As leftist as some of the Republicans are, there are some things they are just not going to do for him so he's got to get them done before the Republicans take over.
There was an article on www.foxnews.com on November 10th which stated: "We are stunned the president would abandon the longstanding, bi-partisan policy of lightly regulating the Internet and calling for extreme" regulation, said Michael Powell, president and CEO of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, the primary lobbying arm of the cable industry." The head Commissar, I mean the President, wanted federal regulators to have the Internet reclassified as a public utility under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.
Supposedly this is all about cable companies and all the rest, but let's don't kid ourselves. This is really all about federal censorship of Internet content. Although they will never admit it, that's the real name of the game. People can go to the Internet and access far more information than the government fells they should have, information that often aids them in deciding what's really going on in Washington--and the feds would rather they not have that information. Intelligent decisions are not something the feds are in favor of when it comes to us "stupid voters." They want us to be dumb and easily led sheeple so they can tell us what we should be doing and we are too dumb to question any of it. Real "freedom" isn't the name of the game, censorship is.
Voters should have learned by now that when this administration tells you anything then you had better start considering that the exact opposite of what they told you comes pretty close to the truth. Remember all those Obamaesque fables about how "transparent" his administration would be? There wasn't much transparency in the "Fast and Furious" gunrunning situation or in the situation with the IRS "lost" emails was there? This administration has told us so little truth you could almost post it on the head of a pin, a very small pin.
And we haven't been told much of anything about Holder's "replacement" at Attorney General--something else Obama wants to get taken care of before the first of the year. Just more "transparency" folks, don't even think about it. However, there was an interesting little article on www.stage2omega.com written by Dr. Orly Taitz on November 9th. Dr. Taitz stated: "...so I am rather certain that Loretta Lynch is an old college friend of Sharon Malone, the wife of the current AG Eric Holder. Why is this connection important? Holder will be investigated by Congress for totally lawless gun trafficking to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious, IRS scandal, VA scandal, DOJ, NSA, EPA, FEC and other scandals. Most importantly, Holder covered up Obama's use of a stolen CT Social Security number of Harrison J. Bounel 042-68-4425 and Obama's use of bogus IDs. It seems that a long time friend of Holder's wife was picked up as a gate keeper to continue all the cover up by Holder and shield Holder and Obama from criminal prosecution."
If Dr. Taitz has all this down pat, then we have to ask "How's all the "transparency" working out for you?
We also have to ask that if Obama claims he needs more government regulation so the Internet can be more "free" then what's the real name of the game? You can bet the farm it ain't "freedom." You can also bet the farm that whatever justification he claims, it won't be long before the Internet is much less free and our access to information that will help us know what really goes on will be as severely restricted as this regime can make it. Real truth is the absolute last thing this regime wants the public to have access to.
Now that the Republicans have taken the Senate it almost seems as if Comrade Obama is in overdrive, trying to accomplish as much of his socialist agenda as possible before the end of the year. And even though many in the Republican-controlled Congress will always be soft of socialism and collectivism he can't be sure enough will be so that his socialist schemes, which he characterizes as "legislation" will always be veto-proof.
That's why he is in such a huff to issue executive orders making millions of illegal immigrants legal before Comrade Reid vacates the senate. As leftist as some of the Republicans are, there are some things they are just not going to do for him so he's got to get them done before the Republicans take over.
There was an article on www.foxnews.com on November 10th which stated: "We are stunned the president would abandon the longstanding, bi-partisan policy of lightly regulating the Internet and calling for extreme" regulation, said Michael Powell, president and CEO of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, the primary lobbying arm of the cable industry." The head Commissar, I mean the President, wanted federal regulators to have the Internet reclassified as a public utility under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.
Supposedly this is all about cable companies and all the rest, but let's don't kid ourselves. This is really all about federal censorship of Internet content. Although they will never admit it, that's the real name of the game. People can go to the Internet and access far more information than the government fells they should have, information that often aids them in deciding what's really going on in Washington--and the feds would rather they not have that information. Intelligent decisions are not something the feds are in favor of when it comes to us "stupid voters." They want us to be dumb and easily led sheeple so they can tell us what we should be doing and we are too dumb to question any of it. Real "freedom" isn't the name of the game, censorship is.
Voters should have learned by now that when this administration tells you anything then you had better start considering that the exact opposite of what they told you comes pretty close to the truth. Remember all those Obamaesque fables about how "transparent" his administration would be? There wasn't much transparency in the "Fast and Furious" gunrunning situation or in the situation with the IRS "lost" emails was there? This administration has told us so little truth you could almost post it on the head of a pin, a very small pin.
And we haven't been told much of anything about Holder's "replacement" at Attorney General--something else Obama wants to get taken care of before the first of the year. Just more "transparency" folks, don't even think about it. However, there was an interesting little article on www.stage2omega.com written by Dr. Orly Taitz on November 9th. Dr. Taitz stated: "...so I am rather certain that Loretta Lynch is an old college friend of Sharon Malone, the wife of the current AG Eric Holder. Why is this connection important? Holder will be investigated by Congress for totally lawless gun trafficking to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious, IRS scandal, VA scandal, DOJ, NSA, EPA, FEC and other scandals. Most importantly, Holder covered up Obama's use of a stolen CT Social Security number of Harrison J. Bounel 042-68-4425 and Obama's use of bogus IDs. It seems that a long time friend of Holder's wife was picked up as a gate keeper to continue all the cover up by Holder and shield Holder and Obama from criminal prosecution."
If Dr. Taitz has all this down pat, then we have to ask "How's all the "transparency" working out for you?
We also have to ask that if Obama claims he needs more government regulation so the Internet can be more "free" then what's the real name of the game? You can bet the farm it ain't "freedom." You can also bet the farm that whatever justification he claims, it won't be long before the Internet is much less free and our access to information that will help us know what really goes on will be as severely restricted as this regime can make it. Real truth is the absolute last thing this regime wants the public to have access to.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
More "Calibration" Errors--What A Surprise!
by Al Benson Jr.
The most recent article I did for this blog spot dealt with a man in Illinois who voted early and wanted to vote Republican but his voting machine would only let him vote Democrat. Although he eventually got his individual problem taken care of, he (and I) wondered if this was going to be a problem with other voting machines.
Of course it's going to be a problem--nationwide. This may well be the way the Democrats regain control of the House and keep the Senate.
An article on www.newsmax.com for October 28, 2014 has stated: "A number of voting machines in Maryland and Illinois are electronically switching Republican votes to the Democrats, raising suspicions that fraud could be at the root of the alleged malfunction...According to Watchdog.org election officials in both states have characterized the problem as a'calibration issue,' but a software developer and expert on touch screens used by U.S. intelligence agencies told Newsmax that the explanation was bogus. 'It's a software issue, and its incredibly suspicious that a bug like that could slip through accidentally. It defies belief' said Tony Heller. He said that any expert trained in the technology could figure out within minutes whether the problem with the software was accidental and deliberate...It's completely unacceptable that an official waved it off as a calibration error. It's something that can be easily verified and should be."
Multiple early voters in Maryland experienced this problem (first Illinois, then Texas, now Maryland) when they tried to vote for Republican candidates only to have their votes registered for Democrats. Does anyone detect a trend here? A Maryland election official characterized it as, guess what, a "calibration error" involving one voting machine. Yet people in four different locations in Maryland had the same problem. What did they do--move this one faulty voting machine around to four different locations??? Equal opportunity election fraud here, folks, line up and get taken! How much does anyone want to bet that there will be lots of "calibration errors" on voting machines in key states that the Democrats need to hold onto?
After all, if you can't trust your government then who can you trust--right? Right? How come I don't hear any answers from anyone?
I'd advise anyone who has to vote using these infernal machines to make sure your vote result tallies with how you voted before you leave the voting booth and if it doesn't then squawk to high heaven about it--loud enough so anyone in line waiting to vote hears your complaint.
The most recent article I did for this blog spot dealt with a man in Illinois who voted early and wanted to vote Republican but his voting machine would only let him vote Democrat. Although he eventually got his individual problem taken care of, he (and I) wondered if this was going to be a problem with other voting machines.
Of course it's going to be a problem--nationwide. This may well be the way the Democrats regain control of the House and keep the Senate.
An article on www.newsmax.com for October 28, 2014 has stated: "A number of voting machines in Maryland and Illinois are electronically switching Republican votes to the Democrats, raising suspicions that fraud could be at the root of the alleged malfunction...According to Watchdog.org election officials in both states have characterized the problem as a'calibration issue,' but a software developer and expert on touch screens used by U.S. intelligence agencies told Newsmax that the explanation was bogus. 'It's a software issue, and its incredibly suspicious that a bug like that could slip through accidentally. It defies belief' said Tony Heller. He said that any expert trained in the technology could figure out within minutes whether the problem with the software was accidental and deliberate...It's completely unacceptable that an official waved it off as a calibration error. It's something that can be easily verified and should be."
Multiple early voters in Maryland experienced this problem (first Illinois, then Texas, now Maryland) when they tried to vote for Republican candidates only to have their votes registered for Democrats. Does anyone detect a trend here? A Maryland election official characterized it as, guess what, a "calibration error" involving one voting machine. Yet people in four different locations in Maryland had the same problem. What did they do--move this one faulty voting machine around to four different locations??? Equal opportunity election fraud here, folks, line up and get taken! How much does anyone want to bet that there will be lots of "calibration errors" on voting machines in key states that the Democrats need to hold onto?
After all, if you can't trust your government then who can you trust--right? Right? How come I don't hear any answers from anyone?
I'd advise anyone who has to vote using these infernal machines to make sure your vote result tallies with how you voted before you leave the voting booth and if it doesn't then squawk to high heaven about it--loud enough so anyone in line waiting to vote hears your complaint.
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
It's Who Counts the Votes Stupid!
by Al Benson Jr.
There is an old saying attributed to Joseph Stalin that goes like this: "It's not those that vote that count. It's the people that count the votes." It sounds just evil enough to have been something Stalin would have said, but, then, the same sentiment could be attributed to some in this country. I have always wondered how Obama managed to get 140% of the vote in some places in the Northeast and I have also wondered why no Republicans ever complained about that. I have my own theory about that and, needless to say, it ain't politically correct.
But, however it happened, through intentional vote fraud, unintentional vote fraud, too many deceased folks voting too many times or through some magical phase of the moon, it looks like we may be getting ready in the upcoming mid-term elections for a repeat performance. I can almost see the headlines the morning after the election: "Democrats pick up enough seats to keep Senate, even pick up several in the House." I hope I am in error, but if such happened it would not surprise me.
This morning (October 21) someone sent me an email about a situation in Schaumburg, Illinois, in Cook County, Illinois. I used to live in Cook County, often called "Crook County" by those who knew what really went on.
Seems a State Representative candidate, Jim Moynihan, who is running in the 56th district decided to take advantage of the early voting program at the Schaumburg Public Library. Mr. Moynihan is a Republican and when he went to vote for himself he found that his voting machine cast his ballot for his Democratic opponent. He said: "You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.." No matter who he tried to vote for, the vote always turned up for some Democrat. Knowing his way around a little bit, Moynihan got hold of the election judge and showed him what his voting machine was doing, and he "was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates." It wasn't reported whether this particular voting machine was removed or not, though I did read another report that said it had been. Supposedly there was a "calibration" error made when the machine was being set up for voting. You might be tempted to wonder, especially in Illinois, how many other voting machines have similar "calibration" errors that will probably not be detected.
I checked this story out on several websites to make sure it was not something that just turned up on one far out site somewhere. Two sites I checked were www.eagnews.com and www.americanthinker.com which is a site that has a pretty good reputation. There were a batch of others but I can't list them all.
Moynihan stated that: "I cannot say whether or not this was intentional, but Cook County voters deserve better and should not have their right to vote suppressed." Good sentiment, and I agree, but Cook County voters have been getting the shaft from the county political machine for so long about so many issues that this would hardly be a surprise. As one commentator reported "They don't call it Crook County for nothing." Sadly he's right.
For years political pundits have railed about crooked politics in Louisiana and Mississippi. I'm here to tell you, folks, these two states have nothing on Illinois when it comes to crooked politics. I recall reading an article awhile back that said: "Illinois, where your governors make your licence plates." That was because so many ex-governors were in prison--from both parties.
No matter where you live, if you have to use a machine to vote instead of a plain old paper ballot, which I think is still the best way, you better check your machine before you leave the voting booth to make sure it recorded who you voted for and not his opponent.
Just to add this on the day following the one I posted this article on, I heard from a friend in Texas who knew someone that voted early in his county and it seems he had the same problem the man in Illinois did--a voting machine that when he voted Republican all it would give him were Democratic results. There must have been lots of "calibration" errors on voting machines across the country this year. Interesting that most of those found thus far seem to favor Democratic candidates. Wonder how that happened? Anyone who still thinks we have honest elections in this country had better buy his tickets for the next Easter Bunny extravaganza from the Tooth Fairy!
There is an old saying attributed to Joseph Stalin that goes like this: "It's not those that vote that count. It's the people that count the votes." It sounds just evil enough to have been something Stalin would have said, but, then, the same sentiment could be attributed to some in this country. I have always wondered how Obama managed to get 140% of the vote in some places in the Northeast and I have also wondered why no Republicans ever complained about that. I have my own theory about that and, needless to say, it ain't politically correct.
But, however it happened, through intentional vote fraud, unintentional vote fraud, too many deceased folks voting too many times or through some magical phase of the moon, it looks like we may be getting ready in the upcoming mid-term elections for a repeat performance. I can almost see the headlines the morning after the election: "Democrats pick up enough seats to keep Senate, even pick up several in the House." I hope I am in error, but if such happened it would not surprise me.
This morning (October 21) someone sent me an email about a situation in Schaumburg, Illinois, in Cook County, Illinois. I used to live in Cook County, often called "Crook County" by those who knew what really went on.
Seems a State Representative candidate, Jim Moynihan, who is running in the 56th district decided to take advantage of the early voting program at the Schaumburg Public Library. Mr. Moynihan is a Republican and when he went to vote for himself he found that his voting machine cast his ballot for his Democratic opponent. He said: "You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.." No matter who he tried to vote for, the vote always turned up for some Democrat. Knowing his way around a little bit, Moynihan got hold of the election judge and showed him what his voting machine was doing, and he "was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates." It wasn't reported whether this particular voting machine was removed or not, though I did read another report that said it had been. Supposedly there was a "calibration" error made when the machine was being set up for voting. You might be tempted to wonder, especially in Illinois, how many other voting machines have similar "calibration" errors that will probably not be detected.
I checked this story out on several websites to make sure it was not something that just turned up on one far out site somewhere. Two sites I checked were www.eagnews.com and www.americanthinker.com which is a site that has a pretty good reputation. There were a batch of others but I can't list them all.
Moynihan stated that: "I cannot say whether or not this was intentional, but Cook County voters deserve better and should not have their right to vote suppressed." Good sentiment, and I agree, but Cook County voters have been getting the shaft from the county political machine for so long about so many issues that this would hardly be a surprise. As one commentator reported "They don't call it Crook County for nothing." Sadly he's right.
For years political pundits have railed about crooked politics in Louisiana and Mississippi. I'm here to tell you, folks, these two states have nothing on Illinois when it comes to crooked politics. I recall reading an article awhile back that said: "Illinois, where your governors make your licence plates." That was because so many ex-governors were in prison--from both parties.
No matter where you live, if you have to use a machine to vote instead of a plain old paper ballot, which I think is still the best way, you better check your machine before you leave the voting booth to make sure it recorded who you voted for and not his opponent.
Just to add this on the day following the one I posted this article on, I heard from a friend in Texas who knew someone that voted early in his county and it seems he had the same problem the man in Illinois did--a voting machine that when he voted Republican all it would give him were Democratic results. There must have been lots of "calibration" errors on voting machines across the country this year. Interesting that most of those found thus far seem to favor Democratic candidates. Wonder how that happened? Anyone who still thinks we have honest elections in this country had better buy his tickets for the next Easter Bunny extravaganza from the Tooth Fairy!
Friday, October 10, 2014
A couple good sites
You all might enjoy checking out a couple good blog spots and a few other things.
jerryd14.wordpress.com which has several thought provoking articles about Lincoln and Southern heritage.
http://troublesomecreekpublications.wordpress.com which contains insightful commentary on some of what passes for politics in our day.
Also, do a Google search for Deovindice.org which is the website for the Confederate Society of America.
http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com which contains many articles on Confederate and Southern heritage, public education and its background and several articles on Marxism and political correctness (which is another form of Marxism)
On this site check out the entry for June 3, 2013 which has information about the home school mini-history course for home school youngsters and others as well.
Check out the book Lincoln's Marxists on both Amazon;com and the Internet in general. It deals with much of the history of the War of Northern Aggression that the establishment historians would rather you didn't know too much about.
jerryd14.wordpress.com which has several thought provoking articles about Lincoln and Southern heritage.
http://troublesomecreekpublications.wordpress.com which contains insightful commentary on some of what passes for politics in our day.
Also, do a Google search for Deovindice.org which is the website for the Confederate Society of America.
http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com which contains many articles on Confederate and Southern heritage, public education and its background and several articles on Marxism and political correctness (which is another form of Marxism)
On this site check out the entry for June 3, 2013 which has information about the home school mini-history course for home school youngsters and others as well.
Check out the book Lincoln's Marxists on both Amazon;com and the Internet in general. It deals with much of the history of the War of Northern Aggression that the establishment historians would rather you didn't know too much about.
Tuesday, October 07, 2014
Obama and Ebola
by Al Benson Jr.
When I first read about the Ebola outbreak in West Africa my first thought was "How long will it be before they manage to bring it to the United States?" Turns out I didn't have too long to wait before I found out and, lo and behold, we had our first Ebola patient from Liberia in a hospital in Dallas, Texas.
At that point, my next thought was--well maybe better if I don't go into my next thought except to say that as this whole situation progressed I got the distinct feeling that Comrade Obama did not have the best interests of the American people at heart. But, then, did he ever?
Columnist Thomas Sowell probably said it much better, and with more gentility, that I ever could have. For those who may not know, Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and a well-known author who happens to be black. Several years ago he wrote an informative book, which I have read, called Inside American Education. In it he told people all that they should have known about the American education system but didn't really want to, lest they have to do something to remedy it.
Just today, 10/7/14, he had a column on townhall.com which also appeared in the Washington Times and in several other outlets. In it he noted: "The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is both a danger in itself and a wake-up call for Americans--about President Obama, about the institutions of this country and, most important, about ourselves."
He continued: "There was a time when an outbreak of a deadly disease overseas would bring virtually unanimous agreement that our top priority should be to keep it overseas. Yet Barack Obama has refused to bar entry to the United States by people from countries where the Ebola epidemic rages, as Britain has done. The reason? Refusing to let people with Ebola enter the United States would conflict with the goal of fighting the disease. In other words, the safety of the American people takes second place to the goal of helping people overseas." Unfortunately, no truer words have been spoken in either this or the last century. The safety of Americans matters not at all to this man. As I've said before, he couldn't care less. And to prove that, he has American troops "fighting Ebola overseas" and downplaying the dangers not only to these soldiers but also to other Americans when those troops do finally come home.
Mr. Sowell then asks the question: "What does this say about Obama? At a minimum it suggests that he takes his conception of himself as a citizen of the world more seriously than he takes his role as President of the United States. At worst, he may consider Americans' interests expendable in the grand scheme of things internationally." I wonder, also, if he considers Americans expendable--and if Ebola gets out here and kills a few thousand--so what?
Obama and his Regime look with absolute contempt on the average American. We exist only to pay his vacation and golfing expenses. He has the mindset of the typical Marxist elitist--the world lives to make me comfortable.
One place I do disagree somewhat with Mr. Sowell is his comments about those who spent considerable effort trying to either validate or invalidate Obama's "birth certificate." Although that effort has not produced everything the investigators hoped for, I believe it was a necessary effort and I cannot help but commend those that undertook it. Whether more turns up in that area or not we will just have to wait and see.
Sowell makes an insightful comment, one most folks have probably not thought much about, when he says: "Those critics who have been citing Barack Obama's foreign policy fiascoes and disasters as evidence that he is incompetent may be overlooking the possibility that he has different priorities than the protection of the American people and America's interests as a nation." If anything that is a masterful understatement of the real situation. The priorities of Americans are last on Obama's list--the one thing he will never get to and he never intended to. He has had his own priorities as well as the agenda of the elite cabal that made sure he got into office and that's all he has an interest in fulfilling. Mr. Sowell seems to have grasped that fact. Too bad more Americans haven't. You would think after him being in office for six years it would have become rather apparent.
Mr. Sowell concluded his article with: "No one knows at this point how big the Ebola danger may turn out to be. But what we do know is that official reassurances about this and other dangers have become worthless. The erosion of Constitutional government over the years has become, under the Obama administration, a deluge of arbitrary edicts and defiant lawlessness protected by a grossly politicized Department of Justice."
No sane person, unless he be prone to delusion, can come up with any other conclusion. Those that helped Obama get into office, either by votes or other methods, have enabled him to preside over the destruction of the country--and he couldn't be happier!
When I first read about the Ebola outbreak in West Africa my first thought was "How long will it be before they manage to bring it to the United States?" Turns out I didn't have too long to wait before I found out and, lo and behold, we had our first Ebola patient from Liberia in a hospital in Dallas, Texas.
At that point, my next thought was--well maybe better if I don't go into my next thought except to say that as this whole situation progressed I got the distinct feeling that Comrade Obama did not have the best interests of the American people at heart. But, then, did he ever?
Columnist Thomas Sowell probably said it much better, and with more gentility, that I ever could have. For those who may not know, Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and a well-known author who happens to be black. Several years ago he wrote an informative book, which I have read, called Inside American Education. In it he told people all that they should have known about the American education system but didn't really want to, lest they have to do something to remedy it.
Just today, 10/7/14, he had a column on townhall.com which also appeared in the Washington Times and in several other outlets. In it he noted: "The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is both a danger in itself and a wake-up call for Americans--about President Obama, about the institutions of this country and, most important, about ourselves."
He continued: "There was a time when an outbreak of a deadly disease overseas would bring virtually unanimous agreement that our top priority should be to keep it overseas. Yet Barack Obama has refused to bar entry to the United States by people from countries where the Ebola epidemic rages, as Britain has done. The reason? Refusing to let people with Ebola enter the United States would conflict with the goal of fighting the disease. In other words, the safety of the American people takes second place to the goal of helping people overseas." Unfortunately, no truer words have been spoken in either this or the last century. The safety of Americans matters not at all to this man. As I've said before, he couldn't care less. And to prove that, he has American troops "fighting Ebola overseas" and downplaying the dangers not only to these soldiers but also to other Americans when those troops do finally come home.
Mr. Sowell then asks the question: "What does this say about Obama? At a minimum it suggests that he takes his conception of himself as a citizen of the world more seriously than he takes his role as President of the United States. At worst, he may consider Americans' interests expendable in the grand scheme of things internationally." I wonder, also, if he considers Americans expendable--and if Ebola gets out here and kills a few thousand--so what?
Obama and his Regime look with absolute contempt on the average American. We exist only to pay his vacation and golfing expenses. He has the mindset of the typical Marxist elitist--the world lives to make me comfortable.
One place I do disagree somewhat with Mr. Sowell is his comments about those who spent considerable effort trying to either validate or invalidate Obama's "birth certificate." Although that effort has not produced everything the investigators hoped for, I believe it was a necessary effort and I cannot help but commend those that undertook it. Whether more turns up in that area or not we will just have to wait and see.
Sowell makes an insightful comment, one most folks have probably not thought much about, when he says: "Those critics who have been citing Barack Obama's foreign policy fiascoes and disasters as evidence that he is incompetent may be overlooking the possibility that he has different priorities than the protection of the American people and America's interests as a nation." If anything that is a masterful understatement of the real situation. The priorities of Americans are last on Obama's list--the one thing he will never get to and he never intended to. He has had his own priorities as well as the agenda of the elite cabal that made sure he got into office and that's all he has an interest in fulfilling. Mr. Sowell seems to have grasped that fact. Too bad more Americans haven't. You would think after him being in office for six years it would have become rather apparent.
Mr. Sowell concluded his article with: "No one knows at this point how big the Ebola danger may turn out to be. But what we do know is that official reassurances about this and other dangers have become worthless. The erosion of Constitutional government over the years has become, under the Obama administration, a deluge of arbitrary edicts and defiant lawlessness protected by a grossly politicized Department of Justice."
No sane person, unless he be prone to delusion, can come up with any other conclusion. Those that helped Obama get into office, either by votes or other methods, have enabled him to preside over the destruction of the country--and he couldn't be happier!
Saturday, October 04, 2014
Does Anybody Really Think He Cares???
by Al Benson Jr.
Just read a post from a Tea Party group which noted that Comrade Obama feels that our dying economy has recovered, but us stupid clods just don't realize yet all he has done for us and so we are not able to feel the great economic recovery he has provided for us. That probably sums up this Regime's attitude toward ordinary Americans--stupid clods. Anyone with eyes to see has to realize that this is exactly what he and this Regime think of us.
As for what we think of him and this current Marxist/Fascist Regime, does anyone honestly think he really cares? I read all manner of articles about polls--what the public thinks of Obama's domestic policy, or his foreign policy or about the performance (or lack thereof) of Congress.
It almost seems like those who publish these various polls think our negative opinions of this Regime will really make a difference. They won't. The person that wrote this brief Tea Party article seems almost like they are about to get. Let's hope they follow through and go all the way.
The writer stated in part: "You can't help but wonder what planet Obama is from."Hint--it's a planet where the Red flag is raised above their capitol and their "leader" is "dictator for life."
But the writer continued: "A recent 60 Minutes interview showed just how far out of touch and disconnected the commander in chief is. It's as if all the numbers, every poll, all the outrage, doesn't even phase him." The writer is just beginning to get it. None of the polls, the numbers, any of it, makes a bit of difference to Obama. What the public has got to begin to realize is that no matter how bad the polls are, the President couldn't care less. He's not disconnected from what we think, he just doesn't give a Tinker's Damn what we think. He's not where he is to listen to or help the American people or to protect their interests. He's there to follow the orders given to him by the CFR/Trilateral/Bilderbeger Cabal and that's the only reason he is there. What the public wants or needs DOES NOT EVEN BEGIN TO ENTER INTO IT! If 99% of the public totally disapproved of what he did and he had orders from his puppet masters to do it, he'd do it anyways.
We've got to learn to disabuse ourselves of the illusion that he cares about the American people. He despises the average American. Oh, he loves the dedicated socialists and Communists, the illegal immigrants, the gay, lesbian and transgender crowd and the Muslim militants. To him these are the citizens worth placating. The rest of us who pay the bills can go to the Hot Place as far as he is concerned. And if he can find a way to use Obamacare to help us on our way he'll be more than ecstatic to do it.
This is where it's at, folks, we need to wake up and smell the coffee. He and his handlers have an agenda--to reduce this country to the status of a third world banana republic and this is what they will do no matter what we want. Nothing will get in the way of that except Divine Intervention, and I can picture Obama and his handlers arguing with God because they think they can do a better job than He can.
We need to repent of our sins and pray that the Lord will restrain the efforts of the One World crowd, not because we deserve it, but because of His grace in Christ. And that's not just a cliche, I'm serious about people praying that way. We need to start doing that. More of us need to start doing it than have been doing it. The power of prayer is something that this Marxist/Fascist Regime will not be able to overcome, though they may try.
Just read a post from a Tea Party group which noted that Comrade Obama feels that our dying economy has recovered, but us stupid clods just don't realize yet all he has done for us and so we are not able to feel the great economic recovery he has provided for us. That probably sums up this Regime's attitude toward ordinary Americans--stupid clods. Anyone with eyes to see has to realize that this is exactly what he and this Regime think of us.
As for what we think of him and this current Marxist/Fascist Regime, does anyone honestly think he really cares? I read all manner of articles about polls--what the public thinks of Obama's domestic policy, or his foreign policy or about the performance (or lack thereof) of Congress.
It almost seems like those who publish these various polls think our negative opinions of this Regime will really make a difference. They won't. The person that wrote this brief Tea Party article seems almost like they are about to get. Let's hope they follow through and go all the way.
The writer stated in part: "You can't help but wonder what planet Obama is from."Hint--it's a planet where the Red flag is raised above their capitol and their "leader" is "dictator for life."
But the writer continued: "A recent 60 Minutes interview showed just how far out of touch and disconnected the commander in chief is. It's as if all the numbers, every poll, all the outrage, doesn't even phase him." The writer is just beginning to get it. None of the polls, the numbers, any of it, makes a bit of difference to Obama. What the public has got to begin to realize is that no matter how bad the polls are, the President couldn't care less. He's not disconnected from what we think, he just doesn't give a Tinker's Damn what we think. He's not where he is to listen to or help the American people or to protect their interests. He's there to follow the orders given to him by the CFR/Trilateral/Bilderbeger Cabal and that's the only reason he is there. What the public wants or needs DOES NOT EVEN BEGIN TO ENTER INTO IT! If 99% of the public totally disapproved of what he did and he had orders from his puppet masters to do it, he'd do it anyways.
We've got to learn to disabuse ourselves of the illusion that he cares about the American people. He despises the average American. Oh, he loves the dedicated socialists and Communists, the illegal immigrants, the gay, lesbian and transgender crowd and the Muslim militants. To him these are the citizens worth placating. The rest of us who pay the bills can go to the Hot Place as far as he is concerned. And if he can find a way to use Obamacare to help us on our way he'll be more than ecstatic to do it.
This is where it's at, folks, we need to wake up and smell the coffee. He and his handlers have an agenda--to reduce this country to the status of a third world banana republic and this is what they will do no matter what we want. Nothing will get in the way of that except Divine Intervention, and I can picture Obama and his handlers arguing with God because they think they can do a better job than He can.
We need to repent of our sins and pray that the Lord will restrain the efforts of the One World crowd, not because we deserve it, but because of His grace in Christ. And that's not just a cliche, I'm serious about people praying that way. We need to start doing that. More of us need to start doing it than have been doing it. The power of prayer is something that this Marxist/Fascist Regime will not be able to overcome, though they may try.
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Something for the Ladies
by Joan Hough Harrington Tomlinson
of Spring, Texas
What about this???
I have long been convinced that there should be a new national organization for those Confederate female descendants and women with Confederate "souls"--no matter their places of birth or that of their ancestors.
These women should be those who can still THINK at least one independent, non-brainwashed thought and have smarts enough to smell something rotten in government, in published history, in the communications media, in political parties, in religion, education, etc. and identify it as rotten.
They should be able to comprehend that Political Correctness is Marxist--and that Lincoln was a provable Marxist-influenced monster, and that the South was right. They should be willing to accept that "truths" they were taught in the government-controlled schools are lies--because real truths are provable.
There needs to be, however, a method for discovering who pretends--and who really has hurled off all the Marxist-Republican brain goo, or is willing and able to do the necessary hurling. One thing our new group would require is a total absence of Southern descendant scalawags who, because of either their streak of opportunism, or because on concrete-lined ignorance refuse to consider even the possibility that any "new to them" information may actually have validity and reliability.
So let's come up with a name for the new group--and let's allow in it any woman whose "soul" is Confederate--no matter her place of birth or her ancestors. Already I know some ladies I'd love to see become charter members!
Think up a name. We will necessarily be an online group as well as perhaps a book review group. And maybe the Confederate Thespians can become a part of it. Think about this.
Now there might be a possibility that we could simply affiliate with the Confederate Society of America. It, however, has a membership of mostly males--but it really is in favor of everything we should be for. Check their website out on the Internet www.deovindice.org They do, however, collect dues I believe. But those are minimal so we could be an adjunct to that group, or be totally independent, but allied with that group.
Whatever we decide to do we had better get on the ball and do it--I'm hitting 84 next month, and they'll not be many more shopping days until Christmas as the saying goes.
Why should we do this? As George Orwell said: "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
If you want to contact me about this, my email address is johough@swbell.net
of Spring, Texas
What about this???
I have long been convinced that there should be a new national organization for those Confederate female descendants and women with Confederate "souls"--no matter their places of birth or that of their ancestors.
These women should be those who can still THINK at least one independent, non-brainwashed thought and have smarts enough to smell something rotten in government, in published history, in the communications media, in political parties, in religion, education, etc. and identify it as rotten.
They should be able to comprehend that Political Correctness is Marxist--and that Lincoln was a provable Marxist-influenced monster, and that the South was right. They should be willing to accept that "truths" they were taught in the government-controlled schools are lies--because real truths are provable.
There needs to be, however, a method for discovering who pretends--and who really has hurled off all the Marxist-Republican brain goo, or is willing and able to do the necessary hurling. One thing our new group would require is a total absence of Southern descendant scalawags who, because of either their streak of opportunism, or because on concrete-lined ignorance refuse to consider even the possibility that any "new to them" information may actually have validity and reliability.
So let's come up with a name for the new group--and let's allow in it any woman whose "soul" is Confederate--no matter her place of birth or her ancestors. Already I know some ladies I'd love to see become charter members!
Think up a name. We will necessarily be an online group as well as perhaps a book review group. And maybe the Confederate Thespians can become a part of it. Think about this.
Now there might be a possibility that we could simply affiliate with the Confederate Society of America. It, however, has a membership of mostly males--but it really is in favor of everything we should be for. Check their website out on the Internet www.deovindice.org They do, however, collect dues I believe. But those are minimal so we could be an adjunct to that group, or be totally independent, but allied with that group.
Whatever we decide to do we had better get on the ball and do it--I'm hitting 84 next month, and they'll not be many more shopping days until Christmas as the saying goes.
Why should we do this? As George Orwell said: "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
If you want to contact me about this, my email address is johough@swbell.net
Monday, September 15, 2014
C'mon Joe, Wake Up and Smell the Coffee
by Al Benson Jr.
No wonder the American electorate is so dumbed down, between what they don't get in public school and what they do get from "conservative" political commentators, it's small wonder they don't have a clue. Years ago someone said that the conservatives really don't conserve anything and, unfortunately, that seems to be right. Often what they end up "conserving" is what the liberals threw out last week.
I read an article on the Newsmax web site just today which was a perfect illustration. The article started out: "Talk show host Joe Scarborough expressed exasperation with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her continued teasing about whether or not she's running for president in 2016...If you're going to run, run, and give us new ideas that help us face the next 25 years..." He's got to be really naive if he expects any "new" ideas from Hillary, but then he turned around and said the same thing to Jeb Bush, his "favorite politician." He said to Jeb Bush "Hey, Jeb, if you're going to run, run,...Come on Mr. Savior of the Republican Party. If you're the savior of the Republican Party, then get out there..."
This is the kind of electoral balderdash that is supposed to bamboozle the electorate. I don't pretend to know if Mr. Scarborough is genuinely naive or if he's part of the ongoing problem. Either way the electorate is ill served and that may be the name of the game.
Both Hillary and Jeb Bush are out there promoting the charade that this is really a genuine election and they they might really be running against each other and that they might actually have some independent ideas that would help the country--if only they'd get out there and spread them around. That's the absolute last thing that will happen. All of these potential "candidates" in both parties are nothing more than political shills and their handlers ultimately will decide which of them get "nominated" to get out there and fool the public. And fooling the public is what it's really all about. It's a great big electoral dog and pony show and the public is guaranteed to get stiffed no matter who wins because, at heart, both parties are controlled by the same Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission/Bilderberger triad and so you will be fed their agenda whether you get it with Republican rhetoric or socialist Democratic rhetoric.
Hillary and Jeb, or whoever ends up running, will not present "new, original" ideas--they will do what they are told to do to further the One World Government agenda and that's all they will do--same as the Marxist playboy you presently have in there. He's only doing what he's been told to do, as were Bush, Clinton, Carter, Ford, and Reagan before him, with few exceptions, all the way back to Woodrow Wilson. All of these presidents have had "alter-egos" behind the throne giving them their marching orders. I,m not sure some of these presidents we've had are capable of coming up with an original thought. But, then, they don't have to. All they have to do is exhibit enough chutzpah to fool the public and then follow the agenda that has been laid out for them.
And with a single One World Government consortium controlling both parties the agenda is always the same no matter which party gets into office. This election will be no different, and if Mr. Scarborough really expects independent and new ideas from either candidate then I have a bridge in the Arizona desert I'd love to sell him.
If you don't think one group control both political parties then you need to get online and read None Dare Call It Conspiracy and The Rockefeller File and see if you can find The Naked Capitalist or Dan Smoot's book The Invisible Government. All of these will give you an overview of who really controls both major political parties in this country, and it sure ain't "we the people." And it's long past time that "we the people" woke up and realized that. There are lots of "conservative" pundits out there that will willingly take us 30 miles when we need to go 100, but they're not willing to admit that the last 70 miles even exists. We need to start being able to discern these fakirs from the real thing.
As far as Jeb or Hillary running for president, they will run if they are told to, and they won't if they're not. It's as simple as that. And if they don't end up running then two other puppets will be put up to woo the public into participating in another electoral charade where the outcome is already determined no matter which party "sits" in the White House.
No wonder the American electorate is so dumbed down, between what they don't get in public school and what they do get from "conservative" political commentators, it's small wonder they don't have a clue. Years ago someone said that the conservatives really don't conserve anything and, unfortunately, that seems to be right. Often what they end up "conserving" is what the liberals threw out last week.
I read an article on the Newsmax web site just today which was a perfect illustration. The article started out: "Talk show host Joe Scarborough expressed exasperation with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her continued teasing about whether or not she's running for president in 2016...If you're going to run, run, and give us new ideas that help us face the next 25 years..." He's got to be really naive if he expects any "new" ideas from Hillary, but then he turned around and said the same thing to Jeb Bush, his "favorite politician." He said to Jeb Bush "Hey, Jeb, if you're going to run, run,...Come on Mr. Savior of the Republican Party. If you're the savior of the Republican Party, then get out there..."
This is the kind of electoral balderdash that is supposed to bamboozle the electorate. I don't pretend to know if Mr. Scarborough is genuinely naive or if he's part of the ongoing problem. Either way the electorate is ill served and that may be the name of the game.
Both Hillary and Jeb Bush are out there promoting the charade that this is really a genuine election and they they might really be running against each other and that they might actually have some independent ideas that would help the country--if only they'd get out there and spread them around. That's the absolute last thing that will happen. All of these potential "candidates" in both parties are nothing more than political shills and their handlers ultimately will decide which of them get "nominated" to get out there and fool the public. And fooling the public is what it's really all about. It's a great big electoral dog and pony show and the public is guaranteed to get stiffed no matter who wins because, at heart, both parties are controlled by the same Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission/Bilderberger triad and so you will be fed their agenda whether you get it with Republican rhetoric or socialist Democratic rhetoric.
Hillary and Jeb, or whoever ends up running, will not present "new, original" ideas--they will do what they are told to do to further the One World Government agenda and that's all they will do--same as the Marxist playboy you presently have in there. He's only doing what he's been told to do, as were Bush, Clinton, Carter, Ford, and Reagan before him, with few exceptions, all the way back to Woodrow Wilson. All of these presidents have had "alter-egos" behind the throne giving them their marching orders. I,m not sure some of these presidents we've had are capable of coming up with an original thought. But, then, they don't have to. All they have to do is exhibit enough chutzpah to fool the public and then follow the agenda that has been laid out for them.
And with a single One World Government consortium controlling both parties the agenda is always the same no matter which party gets into office. This election will be no different, and if Mr. Scarborough really expects independent and new ideas from either candidate then I have a bridge in the Arizona desert I'd love to sell him.
If you don't think one group control both political parties then you need to get online and read None Dare Call It Conspiracy and The Rockefeller File and see if you can find The Naked Capitalist or Dan Smoot's book The Invisible Government. All of these will give you an overview of who really controls both major political parties in this country, and it sure ain't "we the people." And it's long past time that "we the people" woke up and realized that. There are lots of "conservative" pundits out there that will willingly take us 30 miles when we need to go 100, but they're not willing to admit that the last 70 miles even exists. We need to start being able to discern these fakirs from the real thing.
As far as Jeb or Hillary running for president, they will run if they are told to, and they won't if they're not. It's as simple as that. And if they don't end up running then two other puppets will be put up to woo the public into participating in another electoral charade where the outcome is already determined no matter which party "sits" in the White House.
Thursday, September 04, 2014
John Kerry's Bovine Fertilizer
by Al Benson Jr.
I just read an article on ConservativeByte.com which contained a comment by John Kerry about how "peaceful" Islam really is. He claims that these ISIS beheadings don't represent the "real" Islam but are just the work of a few fanatics while the real Islam is a religion of peace and tranquility. Mr. Kerry is either really dumb, really naive, or he sincerely hopes the public listening to him is. Either way, his comments represent the purest grade of bovine fertilizer seen anywhere. As the man says--"you can't make this stuff up." I don't know how he can spout this drivel with a straight face. Any normal person would be rolling on the floor laughing his backside off at such comments--but then we have to remember that he is a member of the Obama Regime, so that sort of throws "normal" out the window.
Kerry had the crust to say: "The real face of Islam is a peaceful religion based on the dignity of all human beings. It's one where Muslin communities are leading the fight against poverty...And it is one where Muslim communities are advocating for universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the most basic freedom to practice one's faith openly and freely." That's all true--as long as you are a Muslim but it doesn't quite hold true for the rest of us.
A Christian missionary from South Africa, Peter Hammond, has written a book called Slavery, Terrorism and Islam. Rev. Hammond has a slightly different take on Islam than Mr. Kerry does, which should not surprise us. Rev. Hammond has noted that "Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In it's fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components. Islamization begins where there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well."
Rev. Hammond observed that, when the Muslim population of a country is around 2% or lower they tend to be pretty peace-loving and quiet, and he listed several countries where this was how it is; the U.S., Australia, Canada, Italy, Norway. He then stated that, at 2%-5% they started to proselytize from other minorities and "disaffected groups" with lots of recruiting from street gangs and in the jails. And he listed countries that fell into that catagory--Denmark, Germany, Great Britain, Spain and Thailand.
And he stated that: "From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on super market chains to feature halal on their shelves--along with threats for failure to comply" and he noted countries where this is happening--France, Sweden, Switzerland, Holland, the Philippines.
And then comes one of the biggies--"At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia Law over the entire world." How much have you read about this in the "news" papers? I've seen a few soundbytes on the Internet concerning such places a Detroit, but, on the whole, this is one of those areas studiously ignored by our major "news" media. After all, you don't want to get people too worked up over this. They might protest and the only protesters this regime wants out there are Muslims, Illegal immigrants and extreme leftists. Everybody else needs to be rocked back to sleep.
"When Muslims approach 10% of the population" Rev. Hammond tells us, "they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris we are already seeing car burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burning of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues"
At 40% he notes widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and continuing militia warfare--all this from Mr. Kerry's "religion of peace." And Rev. Hammond has noted that: "From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide) use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels." So much for Mr. Kerry's "tolerance for other faiths."
Rev. Hammond continues on and there is no way I can cover all he deals with here, but he gives you a clue as to what you can expect if the Muslim mindset ever takes over here (anyplace besides Washington, where it already seems to be in control along with Marxism).
If you think it can't happen here, then I'm sure there are lots of folks in other countries that thought it would never happen in their countries either, but it did and still is. I'd recommend getting Rev. Hammond's book and reading it. It's available on Amazon.com and not hard to find. Christians need to be aware of all this, along with all the other junk that is being thrown at us. Our faith and culture are under constant assault. Maybe its about time we awakened from our spiritual slumber and started to fight back.
I just read an article on ConservativeByte.com which contained a comment by John Kerry about how "peaceful" Islam really is. He claims that these ISIS beheadings don't represent the "real" Islam but are just the work of a few fanatics while the real Islam is a religion of peace and tranquility. Mr. Kerry is either really dumb, really naive, or he sincerely hopes the public listening to him is. Either way, his comments represent the purest grade of bovine fertilizer seen anywhere. As the man says--"you can't make this stuff up." I don't know how he can spout this drivel with a straight face. Any normal person would be rolling on the floor laughing his backside off at such comments--but then we have to remember that he is a member of the Obama Regime, so that sort of throws "normal" out the window.
Kerry had the crust to say: "The real face of Islam is a peaceful religion based on the dignity of all human beings. It's one where Muslin communities are leading the fight against poverty...And it is one where Muslim communities are advocating for universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the most basic freedom to practice one's faith openly and freely." That's all true--as long as you are a Muslim but it doesn't quite hold true for the rest of us.
A Christian missionary from South Africa, Peter Hammond, has written a book called Slavery, Terrorism and Islam. Rev. Hammond has a slightly different take on Islam than Mr. Kerry does, which should not surprise us. Rev. Hammond has noted that "Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In it's fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components. Islamization begins where there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well."
Rev. Hammond observed that, when the Muslim population of a country is around 2% or lower they tend to be pretty peace-loving and quiet, and he listed several countries where this was how it is; the U.S., Australia, Canada, Italy, Norway. He then stated that, at 2%-5% they started to proselytize from other minorities and "disaffected groups" with lots of recruiting from street gangs and in the jails. And he listed countries that fell into that catagory--Denmark, Germany, Great Britain, Spain and Thailand.
And he stated that: "From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on super market chains to feature halal on their shelves--along with threats for failure to comply" and he noted countries where this is happening--France, Sweden, Switzerland, Holland, the Philippines.
And then comes one of the biggies--"At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia Law over the entire world." How much have you read about this in the "news" papers? I've seen a few soundbytes on the Internet concerning such places a Detroit, but, on the whole, this is one of those areas studiously ignored by our major "news" media. After all, you don't want to get people too worked up over this. They might protest and the only protesters this regime wants out there are Muslims, Illegal immigrants and extreme leftists. Everybody else needs to be rocked back to sleep.
"When Muslims approach 10% of the population" Rev. Hammond tells us, "they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris we are already seeing car burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burning of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues"
At 40% he notes widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and continuing militia warfare--all this from Mr. Kerry's "religion of peace." And Rev. Hammond has noted that: "From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide) use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels." So much for Mr. Kerry's "tolerance for other faiths."
Rev. Hammond continues on and there is no way I can cover all he deals with here, but he gives you a clue as to what you can expect if the Muslim mindset ever takes over here (anyplace besides Washington, where it already seems to be in control along with Marxism).
If you think it can't happen here, then I'm sure there are lots of folks in other countries that thought it would never happen in their countries either, but it did and still is. I'd recommend getting Rev. Hammond's book and reading it. It's available on Amazon.com and not hard to find. Christians need to be aware of all this, along with all the other junk that is being thrown at us. Our faith and culture are under constant assault. Maybe its about time we awakened from our spiritual slumber and started to fight back.
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Amerika In Obama's Image--and he likes it!
by Al Benson Jr.
Just this morning I read a short article by Erick Erickson on www.redstate.com in which he states some facts that should be obvious by now to anyone with a brain. If you have not figured out what Mr. Erickson is talking about by now you might as well go back home and watch another "Reality show" on the tube because that's as close to the truth as you will ever get.
Mr. Erickson states: "Our enemies are increasingly on the move across the globe. They are emboldened by a President in mom jeans who'd rather golf than lead." That's pretty much true except that our current president has never led, from his first day in office. He has only ever tried to fulfill the agenda his handlers have given to him. Their agenda was to bring this country down to the level of a third world banana republic, and in that, the president has done rather well. At this point, he has done so well that they don't object a bit if he takes a golfing holiday every ten days at taxpayer expense. He's done what they wanted him to do. And if you want to know who his handlers are, go to the Internet and check out George Soros, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderburg Group. It may take you awhile to wade through some of the stuff about these groups but if you are willing to take the time you can discern where they are coming from and you can find a pattern in Obama's behavior that coincides with their agenda for this country.
Basically, their agenda for this country is its destruction in its present form and its remaking over, via the Marxist "Critical Theory" technique into something that will be a fit home for their version of the "new Soviet Man." To accomplish that end, they needed a president exactly like the one we now have, steeped in Marxist ideology but one willing to do what the big money boys tell him to do. You see, at the highest levels, there is not really all that much difference between the Marxists and the Big Money folks. If you want to know what I am saying here, go on line and check out Gary Allen's book The Rockefeller File or see if you can locate a copy of Cleon Skousen's book The Naked Capitalist. These are both real eye-openers and guaranteed to be material you will never find in your "history" books. Or you might want to check out Gary Allen's other book None Dare Call It Conspiracy which I believe is also online. You can go in and read these books online and it doesn't cost you a dime and you will find out what's been going on in this country and in the world a lot more accurately than you will by checking out some of these "conservative" sites that take folks only ten miles when they need to go fifty.
Further along in his article, Mr. Erickson observes (the article was published on August 27th) that: "One would hardly be surprised if tomorrow he (Obama) declared war on Ferguson, Missouri while sending John Kerry to negotiate a peace treaty with ISIS." What most folks still fail to realize is that he (Obama) has already declared war on Ferguson, Missouri, on Bunkerville, Nevada, and on the entire rest of the country. If that were not so you would not be seeing all the militarized police out in force all around the country and you would not be seeing tanks in the streets, courtesy of "Homeland Security." All these things should demonstrate to us that we are already an occupied country. All the feds are waiting for is a big enough false flag event to occur so they can make it official.
Then Mr. Erickson makes an interesting statement. He says: "Meanwhile Barack Obama is peeing sitting down." My first thought at that statement was "What does he know that the average American doesn't, thanks to the almost total blackout of anything in opposition to Obama by our bought-and-paid-for "news" media?
Erickson notes that our border is not secure. Of course it's not. It's not intended to be--ever again. It's to be done away with in our One World march toward a greater North American Union, another favorite of the CFR/Trilateral folks. And Obama couldn't care less. After all, he's not responsible for any of this--he's just following orders. We have to disabuse ourselves of the idea that any of this is original with him. He's doing what he's been told to do--simple as that. That's what all presidents do anymore--what they're told to do. And there's always someone in back of them to make sure they work to fulfill the desired agenda--Woodrow Wilson had Edward Mandell House; Richard Nixon had Henry Kissinger; Ronald Reagan had George Bush Sr.; George Bush Jr. had Cheney, and Obama has Valerie Jarrett.
A few years ago I had a friend, (now deceased) who told me that he knew a man who worked for the government who told him that he'd be surprised if he ever really knew who ran this country--that it's really run by a bunch of people we would never expect and will hardly ever know anything about--thanks to the "news" media. The president is usually little more than their front man.
So don't be surprised at what happens. It's all going according to plan and none of it happens by accident. Could the Lord intervene? Sure He could. The fact that, so far, He hasn't (at least that we know of) may well mean that we are getting what we deserve--and that is a scary thought.
Just this morning I read a short article by Erick Erickson on www.redstate.com in which he states some facts that should be obvious by now to anyone with a brain. If you have not figured out what Mr. Erickson is talking about by now you might as well go back home and watch another "Reality show" on the tube because that's as close to the truth as you will ever get.
Mr. Erickson states: "Our enemies are increasingly on the move across the globe. They are emboldened by a President in mom jeans who'd rather golf than lead." That's pretty much true except that our current president has never led, from his first day in office. He has only ever tried to fulfill the agenda his handlers have given to him. Their agenda was to bring this country down to the level of a third world banana republic, and in that, the president has done rather well. At this point, he has done so well that they don't object a bit if he takes a golfing holiday every ten days at taxpayer expense. He's done what they wanted him to do. And if you want to know who his handlers are, go to the Internet and check out George Soros, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderburg Group. It may take you awhile to wade through some of the stuff about these groups but if you are willing to take the time you can discern where they are coming from and you can find a pattern in Obama's behavior that coincides with their agenda for this country.
Basically, their agenda for this country is its destruction in its present form and its remaking over, via the Marxist "Critical Theory" technique into something that will be a fit home for their version of the "new Soviet Man." To accomplish that end, they needed a president exactly like the one we now have, steeped in Marxist ideology but one willing to do what the big money boys tell him to do. You see, at the highest levels, there is not really all that much difference between the Marxists and the Big Money folks. If you want to know what I am saying here, go on line and check out Gary Allen's book The Rockefeller File or see if you can locate a copy of Cleon Skousen's book The Naked Capitalist. These are both real eye-openers and guaranteed to be material you will never find in your "history" books. Or you might want to check out Gary Allen's other book None Dare Call It Conspiracy which I believe is also online. You can go in and read these books online and it doesn't cost you a dime and you will find out what's been going on in this country and in the world a lot more accurately than you will by checking out some of these "conservative" sites that take folks only ten miles when they need to go fifty.
Further along in his article, Mr. Erickson observes (the article was published on August 27th) that: "One would hardly be surprised if tomorrow he (Obama) declared war on Ferguson, Missouri while sending John Kerry to negotiate a peace treaty with ISIS." What most folks still fail to realize is that he (Obama) has already declared war on Ferguson, Missouri, on Bunkerville, Nevada, and on the entire rest of the country. If that were not so you would not be seeing all the militarized police out in force all around the country and you would not be seeing tanks in the streets, courtesy of "Homeland Security." All these things should demonstrate to us that we are already an occupied country. All the feds are waiting for is a big enough false flag event to occur so they can make it official.
Then Mr. Erickson makes an interesting statement. He says: "Meanwhile Barack Obama is peeing sitting down." My first thought at that statement was "What does he know that the average American doesn't, thanks to the almost total blackout of anything in opposition to Obama by our bought-and-paid-for "news" media?
Erickson notes that our border is not secure. Of course it's not. It's not intended to be--ever again. It's to be done away with in our One World march toward a greater North American Union, another favorite of the CFR/Trilateral folks. And Obama couldn't care less. After all, he's not responsible for any of this--he's just following orders. We have to disabuse ourselves of the idea that any of this is original with him. He's doing what he's been told to do--simple as that. That's what all presidents do anymore--what they're told to do. And there's always someone in back of them to make sure they work to fulfill the desired agenda--Woodrow Wilson had Edward Mandell House; Richard Nixon had Henry Kissinger; Ronald Reagan had George Bush Sr.; George Bush Jr. had Cheney, and Obama has Valerie Jarrett.
A few years ago I had a friend, (now deceased) who told me that he knew a man who worked for the government who told him that he'd be surprised if he ever really knew who ran this country--that it's really run by a bunch of people we would never expect and will hardly ever know anything about--thanks to the "news" media. The president is usually little more than their front man.
So don't be surprised at what happens. It's all going according to plan and none of it happens by accident. Could the Lord intervene? Sure He could. The fact that, so far, He hasn't (at least that we know of) may well mean that we are getting what we deserve--and that is a scary thought.
Monday, August 25, 2014
The Police State, Ferguson, Missouri and Other Places
by Al Benson Jr.
Recently I have done a few articles noting that the government we now have in Washington, supposedly headed up by a president who is a Marxist, is actually declaring war on its own citizens, much the same as Abraham Lincoln did in 1861. As we are treated to more and more photos of local police who look like United Nations Swat Team members, this has to become apparent to even the most casual observer.
Recently on www.personalliberty.com former Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, who I consider the only truly honest man to run in the 2012 presidential election, made some statements I think we need to consider. Dr. Paul observed: "The increasing use of military equipment by local police is a symptom of growing authoritarianism, not the cause. The cause is policies that encourage the police to see Americans as enemies to subjugate, rather than as citizens to 'protect and serve.' This attitude is on display not only in Ferguson, but in the police lockdown following the Boston Marathon bombing and in the Americans killed and injured in 'no-knock raids by militarized SWAT teams." Dr. Paul noted one case where a SWAT team member threw a flash-burn grenade into an infant's crib after he had broken into the baby's room looking for drugs.
And he stated: "Today, the war on drugs has been eclipsed by the war on terror as an all-purpose excuse for expanding the police state." That's exactly what it is--an excuse. The attitude that local police seem to have about the people in their cities and towns being their enemies is one fostered and promoted in Washington because this current regime does, in fact, see the average American citizen as its enemy, to be controlled, subdued and shut up so he can no longer protest this current rogue regime that has gone so far beyond the law it isn't even funny. People talk about "government over-reach." That's putting it quite mildly. How about federal tyranny? The rule of law in this country is dead and the average American is now subject to whatever our current socialist dictators would love to do to us.
Dr. Paul has stated that: "Reversing the dangerous trend of the militarization of local police can start with ending all federal involvement in local law enforcement. Fortunately, all that requires is for Congress to begin following the Constitution, which forbids the federal government from controlling or funding local law enforcement. There is also no justification for federal drug laws or for using the threat of terrorism as an excuse to treat all people as potential criminals." Unfortunately, waiting for Congress to do its duty in this area is as big an exercise in futility as sitting and waiting for the moon to turn into a hunk of green cheese. This miserable Congress (and I am being charitable) will do nothing it is supposed to do unless forced to. It's lots easier for them to just feed at the public trough while our Marxist president issues his "executive orders" to run the country, which they can then complain about but never do anything to reverse the trend. That's the wonderful thing about Washington rhetoric--it sounds so resoundingly great and noble--and is so utterly meaningless, but it does fool the gullible, and that's what it's supposed to do.
Mid-term elections are coming up this November 4th. If the electorate is stupid enough and gullible enough to vote the current political hacks back into office then I guess we deserve what we are willing to permit.
And as far as local police that resemble SWAT team members and consider the public at large to be their potential adversaries, get used to it. It's the wave of the future in this once great country. The attitude from Washington that they must now declare war on their own people is finally filtering down to the local and state levels and since most of us have not bothered to do anything to prevent it then I guess we had better learn to live with it.
Our government, at all levels, has met the enemy--and he is US!
Recently I have done a few articles noting that the government we now have in Washington, supposedly headed up by a president who is a Marxist, is actually declaring war on its own citizens, much the same as Abraham Lincoln did in 1861. As we are treated to more and more photos of local police who look like United Nations Swat Team members, this has to become apparent to even the most casual observer.
Recently on www.personalliberty.com former Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, who I consider the only truly honest man to run in the 2012 presidential election, made some statements I think we need to consider. Dr. Paul observed: "The increasing use of military equipment by local police is a symptom of growing authoritarianism, not the cause. The cause is policies that encourage the police to see Americans as enemies to subjugate, rather than as citizens to 'protect and serve.' This attitude is on display not only in Ferguson, but in the police lockdown following the Boston Marathon bombing and in the Americans killed and injured in 'no-knock raids by militarized SWAT teams." Dr. Paul noted one case where a SWAT team member threw a flash-burn grenade into an infant's crib after he had broken into the baby's room looking for drugs.
And he stated: "Today, the war on drugs has been eclipsed by the war on terror as an all-purpose excuse for expanding the police state." That's exactly what it is--an excuse. The attitude that local police seem to have about the people in their cities and towns being their enemies is one fostered and promoted in Washington because this current regime does, in fact, see the average American citizen as its enemy, to be controlled, subdued and shut up so he can no longer protest this current rogue regime that has gone so far beyond the law it isn't even funny. People talk about "government over-reach." That's putting it quite mildly. How about federal tyranny? The rule of law in this country is dead and the average American is now subject to whatever our current socialist dictators would love to do to us.
Dr. Paul has stated that: "Reversing the dangerous trend of the militarization of local police can start with ending all federal involvement in local law enforcement. Fortunately, all that requires is for Congress to begin following the Constitution, which forbids the federal government from controlling or funding local law enforcement. There is also no justification for federal drug laws or for using the threat of terrorism as an excuse to treat all people as potential criminals." Unfortunately, waiting for Congress to do its duty in this area is as big an exercise in futility as sitting and waiting for the moon to turn into a hunk of green cheese. This miserable Congress (and I am being charitable) will do nothing it is supposed to do unless forced to. It's lots easier for them to just feed at the public trough while our Marxist president issues his "executive orders" to run the country, which they can then complain about but never do anything to reverse the trend. That's the wonderful thing about Washington rhetoric--it sounds so resoundingly great and noble--and is so utterly meaningless, but it does fool the gullible, and that's what it's supposed to do.
Mid-term elections are coming up this November 4th. If the electorate is stupid enough and gullible enough to vote the current political hacks back into office then I guess we deserve what we are willing to permit.
And as far as local police that resemble SWAT team members and consider the public at large to be their potential adversaries, get used to it. It's the wave of the future in this once great country. The attitude from Washington that they must now declare war on their own people is finally filtering down to the local and state levels and since most of us have not bothered to do anything to prevent it then I guess we had better learn to live with it.
Our government, at all levels, has met the enemy--and he is US!
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Follow up on Donnie Kennedy Interview
by Al Benson Jr.
I talked with Donnie Kennedy on Tuesday morning, August 19th regarding his interview on the Alan Colmes show on Fox Radio. Most folks realize that Colmes is a rank liberal, and Donnie realized that before he went on his show, so he knew where Colmes would be coming from.
Donnie felt that he held his own pretty well during the interview and although I did not get to hear it, I think he probably did too. I have heard Donnie talk on tv before in front of questionable hosts and he held his own.
Part of the reason he agreed to the interview was to have an opportunity to get a little exposure for the book he and I co-authored, "Lincoln's Marxists." We have felt that, with this book, we covered the kind of material that the "historians"--so called, just love to leave out regarding Mr. Lincoln, the Republican Party, and the socialist and Communist influence that was very prevalent in this country at that time, and has continued on ever since.
There are many on the left that have commented on our book and the blanket charge they all throw at is is "they say Lincoln was a Communist." In fact, we have not said that, but then, who are these people to worry about facts? Their agenda is to spread propaganda, not truth. We have said that Lincoln and the Republican Party were influenced by socialists and communists and there is evidence to back that up. If you want to know where, then you will have to read the book. It's all in there and we give sources, but we never said "Lincoln was a communist."
One of our major concerns is that folks in the Southern and Confederate Movements have been almost totally unaware of this. Both Donnie and I have given speeches to Southern groups over the past few years and when you bring up some of the material we've dug up on Lincoln's involvement with the socialist "Forty-eighters" from Europe you can see people's jaws drop! They never heard this until we dealt with it--which tells you something about the quality of what passes of history nowadays, even in conservative circles.
Lord willing, we plan to keep on hammering away with this information. People, North and South, need to know the real history and we try to provide as much of it as we are able to in "Lincoln's Marxists."
I talked with Donnie Kennedy on Tuesday morning, August 19th regarding his interview on the Alan Colmes show on Fox Radio. Most folks realize that Colmes is a rank liberal, and Donnie realized that before he went on his show, so he knew where Colmes would be coming from.
Donnie felt that he held his own pretty well during the interview and although I did not get to hear it, I think he probably did too. I have heard Donnie talk on tv before in front of questionable hosts and he held his own.
Part of the reason he agreed to the interview was to have an opportunity to get a little exposure for the book he and I co-authored, "Lincoln's Marxists." We have felt that, with this book, we covered the kind of material that the "historians"--so called, just love to leave out regarding Mr. Lincoln, the Republican Party, and the socialist and Communist influence that was very prevalent in this country at that time, and has continued on ever since.
There are many on the left that have commented on our book and the blanket charge they all throw at is is "they say Lincoln was a Communist." In fact, we have not said that, but then, who are these people to worry about facts? Their agenda is to spread propaganda, not truth. We have said that Lincoln and the Republican Party were influenced by socialists and communists and there is evidence to back that up. If you want to know where, then you will have to read the book. It's all in there and we give sources, but we never said "Lincoln was a communist."
One of our major concerns is that folks in the Southern and Confederate Movements have been almost totally unaware of this. Both Donnie and I have given speeches to Southern groups over the past few years and when you bring up some of the material we've dug up on Lincoln's involvement with the socialist "Forty-eighters" from Europe you can see people's jaws drop! They never heard this until we dealt with it--which tells you something about the quality of what passes of history nowadays, even in conservative circles.
Lord willing, we plan to keep on hammering away with this information. People, North and South, need to know the real history and we try to provide as much of it as we are able to in "Lincoln's Marxists."
Sunday, August 17, 2014
Donnie Kennedy on Alan Colmes radio show on 8/18/14
Donnie Kennedy, co-author of "Lincoln's Marxists" with Al Benson Jr. will be interviewed by Alan Colmes on his FoxRadio show at 6:05 in the morning on August 18, 2014 for those up early enough to hear him.
Alan Colmes is the national syndicated host of the Alan Colmes Radio show. Donnie will discuss what we wrote about in "Lincoln's Marxists" and the socialist influence on the Union war effort.
Check out http://www.alan.com
Donnie always gives a good interview and holds his own with liberal commentators.
Alan Colmes is the national syndicated host of the Alan Colmes Radio show. Donnie will discuss what we wrote about in "Lincoln's Marxists" and the socialist influence on the Union war effort.
Check out http://www.alan.com
Donnie always gives a good interview and holds his own with liberal commentators.
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Following the Money at Washington and Lee
by Al Benson Jr.
After the culturally genocidal move of Washington and Lee University to ban all Confederate symbols, uniforms, flags, whatever, from the Washington and Lee campus, someone on my email list sent me a message in which he wondered where Washington and Lee got some of its funding. I thought that was a legitimate question and I hadn't seen anyplace where that was dealt with, not that I am surprised at that. So I did a bit of "huntin' and peckin" on the Internet, as my daughter calls it to see what I could find.
The six black students who were so uncomfortable with Confederate symbols are all law students, at least according to the news accounts I've read and they want everything Confederate removed from the campus and they've threatened "civil disobedience" if no one paid attention to their demands. That the school administration grovelled before them doesn't surprise me in the least. In the experience I've had with colleges they always seem to bend over backwards to cow-tow to the deviations of the leftist politically correct. No one else matters to them. That the majority of their students may not be politically correct and may not agree to the deviations of the left makes no difference whatever. The squeaky wheel always get the grease.
In scrounging around on the Internet I came across a couple things of interest. There was an article posted on April 30, 2014 by a Peter Jetton, the headline for which was: "W and L Tax Clinic Receives IRS Grant for Seventh Straight Year." The article started off: "The Tax Clinic at the Washington and Lee University School of Law has been awarded a matching grant from the Internal Revenue Service's Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic Program (LITC). This is the seventh straight year that the Tax Clinic has received federal dollars to support its efforts. The grant of $75,000, the largest in the Clinic's history, will help fund the Clinic for the 2014 calendar year."
According to another article, the clinic is directed by Michelle Lyon Drumbl, a former IRS attorney who is an assistant clinical professor of law at Washington and Lee University. The article went on to note that the Tax Clinic is "independent of the IRS and the federal government." That may be so, but they still take money from the IRS.
Back in August of 2010, in an article by Jeff Hanna, which appeared on http://www.wlu.edu it was noted that: "Affordable high-speed Internet access will be extended to Rockbridge County residents and a new shared data center will be built at Washington and Lee University, both as a result of a $6.9 million federal grant announced on Wednesday, Aug 18." I submit that $6.9 million ain't chump change. It seems that the university has done pretty well with federal grants over the years.
I don't know if any of this federal money has had any influence on how quickly the university sought to purge its campus of anything Confederate or not. I can't say for sure. But, with my suspicious mind it does make me wonder. Had the university leadership had the intestinal fortitude to at least look at the other side of this issue and consider how people on both sides felt, would further federal funding have been withheld? Again, we don't know, but it would be nice if we did. Is federal money used to blackmail institutions into doing what the feds want done? It wouldn't be the first time. They tried the same game at Hillsdale College in Michigan several years ago now and the way the Hillsdale administration got around it was to end up flat-out refusing to accept any students that took federal aid in any form. Based on what I have read about the leadership at Washington and Lee, I doubt they would be willing to do that. Cultural genocide against Christian whites and their history and heritage is much less expensive.
After the culturally genocidal move of Washington and Lee University to ban all Confederate symbols, uniforms, flags, whatever, from the Washington and Lee campus, someone on my email list sent me a message in which he wondered where Washington and Lee got some of its funding. I thought that was a legitimate question and I hadn't seen anyplace where that was dealt with, not that I am surprised at that. So I did a bit of "huntin' and peckin" on the Internet, as my daughter calls it to see what I could find.
The six black students who were so uncomfortable with Confederate symbols are all law students, at least according to the news accounts I've read and they want everything Confederate removed from the campus and they've threatened "civil disobedience" if no one paid attention to their demands. That the school administration grovelled before them doesn't surprise me in the least. In the experience I've had with colleges they always seem to bend over backwards to cow-tow to the deviations of the leftist politically correct. No one else matters to them. That the majority of their students may not be politically correct and may not agree to the deviations of the left makes no difference whatever. The squeaky wheel always get the grease.
In scrounging around on the Internet I came across a couple things of interest. There was an article posted on April 30, 2014 by a Peter Jetton, the headline for which was: "W and L Tax Clinic Receives IRS Grant for Seventh Straight Year." The article started off: "The Tax Clinic at the Washington and Lee University School of Law has been awarded a matching grant from the Internal Revenue Service's Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic Program (LITC). This is the seventh straight year that the Tax Clinic has received federal dollars to support its efforts. The grant of $75,000, the largest in the Clinic's history, will help fund the Clinic for the 2014 calendar year."
According to another article, the clinic is directed by Michelle Lyon Drumbl, a former IRS attorney who is an assistant clinical professor of law at Washington and Lee University. The article went on to note that the Tax Clinic is "independent of the IRS and the federal government." That may be so, but they still take money from the IRS.
Back in August of 2010, in an article by Jeff Hanna, which appeared on http://www.wlu.edu it was noted that: "Affordable high-speed Internet access will be extended to Rockbridge County residents and a new shared data center will be built at Washington and Lee University, both as a result of a $6.9 million federal grant announced on Wednesday, Aug 18." I submit that $6.9 million ain't chump change. It seems that the university has done pretty well with federal grants over the years.
I don't know if any of this federal money has had any influence on how quickly the university sought to purge its campus of anything Confederate or not. I can't say for sure. But, with my suspicious mind it does make me wonder. Had the university leadership had the intestinal fortitude to at least look at the other side of this issue and consider how people on both sides felt, would further federal funding have been withheld? Again, we don't know, but it would be nice if we did. Is federal money used to blackmail institutions into doing what the feds want done? It wouldn't be the first time. They tried the same game at Hillsdale College in Michigan several years ago now and the way the Hillsdale administration got around it was to end up flat-out refusing to accept any students that took federal aid in any form. Based on what I have read about the leadership at Washington and Lee, I doubt they would be willing to do that. Cultural genocide against Christian whites and their history and heritage is much less expensive.
Sunday, July 27, 2014
Cultural Genocide in Lexington, Virginia--what else is new?
by Al Benson Jr.
Cultural genocide against white Christians has almost become so commonplace that most folks don't even notice it anymore and it's just as bad in the South, if not worse, than in many other places. The cultural genocide promoters are beginning to feel at this point, with the leftist political slant so obvious now in Washington, that they have it within their grasp to completely eradicate Confederate and Southern culture if they just push a little harder, just get rid of a few more Confederate statues, change the names of a few more streets from Stonewall Jackson Blvd. to Malcolm X Avenue, and get rid of any Confederate flags or symbols in any and all institutions of learning, then they can erase all memory of Confederate and Southern history--all except for the slavery issue. That one has to be kept alive because the hope for some sort of future reparations is still down the road. All they have to do is to promote a little more white guilt and the silver will start to flow--right into their pockets. You have to realize that if there are ever any reparations paid they will not go to ordinary black folks, they will be paid to the race-baiters and those who know how to deal the race card off the bottom of the deck. That's really what it's all about for them--fleecing whitey!
Recently, at Washington and Lee University, several black students entered the chapel and felt "uncomfortable" with the Confederate flag, with its St. Andrews Cross hanging in there. I don't know what their agenda was (I can guess) but they went to the head of the school and complained.
The president of the school, Mr. Kenneth Ruscio, apparently is even beyond being politically correct. I get the impression from what I've read that he almost tripped over his own feet getting over to the chapel to get those "evil" Confederate flags out of there. Needless to say, there has been considerable protest against his eager willingness to play the politically correct "fearless leader." Not that he cares, because, like most of those in leadership positions in colleges and universities nowadays he has been so imbued with the "white guilt" syndrome that he can't wait to do the bidding of the leftist black radicals. He's their boy, all the way!
I wish I had a dollar for every letter that Mr. Ruscio has gotten about this situation from Southern patriots. I could probably take a trip to Mexico and back--if I could ever fight my way through the hoards of illegal immigrants to get there, or somehow manage to get through the Border Patrol checkpoints which seem more interested in harassing American citizens than in catching illegals. But I digress.
At Washington and Lee University you can tell the agenda is definitely Cultural Genocide. A 15-year old youngster, who had come with some people that were protesting what the university had done in removing Confederate flags, assayed to go into the chapel at the university because he just wanted to see the chapel and the grave of Lee's horse, Traveler. The youngster observed: "As I began to head for the Lee Chapel, a police officer stopped me and said that I could not enter the campus property with my Battle Flag or any images of Confederate flags on any of my possessions including my clothing. I really wanted to pay my respects to General Lee and Traveler so I had to turn my shirt inside out, take off my hat, and take off my badge. When I finally arrived at the chapel there was a sign on the front door saying that the Lee Chapel was closed for the weekend."
Folks, I ask, isn't that just a bit extreme? But, then, leftist cultural genocide is never anything but extreme--after all, when your agenda is the destruction of white, Christian culture, you can't afford to do it by half-way measures--you've got to go all the way, and if you can't get it buried deep enough, it might just rise up and haunt you.
Understand, when these black radicals prattle about "love and diversity" and "multiculturalism" there is no room for you in all that. You are supposed to be gone, eliminated, or at least marginalized to the point where you don't dare say anything. That this is part and parcel of the agenda of most schools nowadays should be evident from what has gone on at Washington and Lee University recently. The Marxist radicals feel they are in the ascendancy so there's no room for you. Since this is the position that Washington and Lee University has taken, I'd suggest that anyone planning to send their kids to that school might want to think twice and possibly choose another school--unless you are prepared to surrender your cultural identity for a mess of "racist" pottage.
Cultural genocide against white Christians has almost become so commonplace that most folks don't even notice it anymore and it's just as bad in the South, if not worse, than in many other places. The cultural genocide promoters are beginning to feel at this point, with the leftist political slant so obvious now in Washington, that they have it within their grasp to completely eradicate Confederate and Southern culture if they just push a little harder, just get rid of a few more Confederate statues, change the names of a few more streets from Stonewall Jackson Blvd. to Malcolm X Avenue, and get rid of any Confederate flags or symbols in any and all institutions of learning, then they can erase all memory of Confederate and Southern history--all except for the slavery issue. That one has to be kept alive because the hope for some sort of future reparations is still down the road. All they have to do is to promote a little more white guilt and the silver will start to flow--right into their pockets. You have to realize that if there are ever any reparations paid they will not go to ordinary black folks, they will be paid to the race-baiters and those who know how to deal the race card off the bottom of the deck. That's really what it's all about for them--fleecing whitey!
Recently, at Washington and Lee University, several black students entered the chapel and felt "uncomfortable" with the Confederate flag, with its St. Andrews Cross hanging in there. I don't know what their agenda was (I can guess) but they went to the head of the school and complained.
The president of the school, Mr. Kenneth Ruscio, apparently is even beyond being politically correct. I get the impression from what I've read that he almost tripped over his own feet getting over to the chapel to get those "evil" Confederate flags out of there. Needless to say, there has been considerable protest against his eager willingness to play the politically correct "fearless leader." Not that he cares, because, like most of those in leadership positions in colleges and universities nowadays he has been so imbued with the "white guilt" syndrome that he can't wait to do the bidding of the leftist black radicals. He's their boy, all the way!
I wish I had a dollar for every letter that Mr. Ruscio has gotten about this situation from Southern patriots. I could probably take a trip to Mexico and back--if I could ever fight my way through the hoards of illegal immigrants to get there, or somehow manage to get through the Border Patrol checkpoints which seem more interested in harassing American citizens than in catching illegals. But I digress.
At Washington and Lee University you can tell the agenda is definitely Cultural Genocide. A 15-year old youngster, who had come with some people that were protesting what the university had done in removing Confederate flags, assayed to go into the chapel at the university because he just wanted to see the chapel and the grave of Lee's horse, Traveler. The youngster observed: "As I began to head for the Lee Chapel, a police officer stopped me and said that I could not enter the campus property with my Battle Flag or any images of Confederate flags on any of my possessions including my clothing. I really wanted to pay my respects to General Lee and Traveler so I had to turn my shirt inside out, take off my hat, and take off my badge. When I finally arrived at the chapel there was a sign on the front door saying that the Lee Chapel was closed for the weekend."
Folks, I ask, isn't that just a bit extreme? But, then, leftist cultural genocide is never anything but extreme--after all, when your agenda is the destruction of white, Christian culture, you can't afford to do it by half-way measures--you've got to go all the way, and if you can't get it buried deep enough, it might just rise up and haunt you.
Understand, when these black radicals prattle about "love and diversity" and "multiculturalism" there is no room for you in all that. You are supposed to be gone, eliminated, or at least marginalized to the point where you don't dare say anything. That this is part and parcel of the agenda of most schools nowadays should be evident from what has gone on at Washington and Lee University recently. The Marxist radicals feel they are in the ascendancy so there's no room for you. Since this is the position that Washington and Lee University has taken, I'd suggest that anyone planning to send their kids to that school might want to think twice and possibly choose another school--unless you are prepared to surrender your cultural identity for a mess of "racist" pottage.
Saturday, July 19, 2014
We We're Right About the Anti-Illegal Amnesty Protests And the "News" Media
by Al Benson Jr.
Today, on the Internet, WorldNet Daily had an article about the anti-amnesty protests taking place across the country. Their article noted that there were protests in 319 different cities across the country. It also noted, as I said yesterday, that the regular "news" media would almost totally try to ignore and suppress information about the protests.
The media Ministry of Propaganda gets paid to make sure Comrade Obama looks good to the public (and they are really having to earn their money nowadays) and info about these protests will make the Marxist-in-Chief in the White House look bad so they must try to suppress all they can. Even Fox News has pretty much ignored these protests and that tells you where Fox News is really at--the same place all the other media prostitutes are at.
At any rate, the WorldNet Daily Internet article had photos of several of the demonstrations around the country, notably in the South and West. While whatever "news" media did take note of this went out of their way to label the protesters as "racists" which I also said would happen, the WorldNet Daily photos showed black people out there demonstrating against the illegal aliens along with white folks. Many blacks are finally starting to figure out that their blind support of Obama because of his skin color is going to cost them. And it will for a fact.
If the illegal aliens are given amnesty and allowed to remain in the country, what will that do to job possibilities for Americans of whatever color? You have to know this Regime will pass along whatever job possibilities it can to the illegals at the expense of Americans. That's the way this Regime operates. Ordinary Americans are at the bottom of this Regime's totem pole and they are expected to support all the weight of the millions of illegals we already have and that Obama wants to bring in. That's the name of the game folks, and all of you that voted for Obama have helped to sow the seeds of your own destruction. Comforting thought, ain't it?
Today, on the Internet, WorldNet Daily had an article about the anti-amnesty protests taking place across the country. Their article noted that there were protests in 319 different cities across the country. It also noted, as I said yesterday, that the regular "news" media would almost totally try to ignore and suppress information about the protests.
The media Ministry of Propaganda gets paid to make sure Comrade Obama looks good to the public (and they are really having to earn their money nowadays) and info about these protests will make the Marxist-in-Chief in the White House look bad so they must try to suppress all they can. Even Fox News has pretty much ignored these protests and that tells you where Fox News is really at--the same place all the other media prostitutes are at.
At any rate, the WorldNet Daily Internet article had photos of several of the demonstrations around the country, notably in the South and West. While whatever "news" media did take note of this went out of their way to label the protesters as "racists" which I also said would happen, the WorldNet Daily photos showed black people out there demonstrating against the illegal aliens along with white folks. Many blacks are finally starting to figure out that their blind support of Obama because of his skin color is going to cost them. And it will for a fact.
If the illegal aliens are given amnesty and allowed to remain in the country, what will that do to job possibilities for Americans of whatever color? You have to know this Regime will pass along whatever job possibilities it can to the illegals at the expense of Americans. That's the way this Regime operates. Ordinary Americans are at the bottom of this Regime's totem pole and they are expected to support all the weight of the millions of illegals we already have and that Obama wants to bring in. That's the name of the game folks, and all of you that voted for Obama have helped to sow the seeds of your own destruction. Comforting thought, ain't it?
Friday, July 18, 2014
Protests nationally over amnesty for illegal aliens on July 18-19, 2014
by Al Benson Jr.
Although the "news" media will try not to give it much coverage there is a big national protest going on over the weekend of July 18-19 all across the country. Demonstrations are being carried out in many states, often on overpasses on Interstate highways so that lots of drivers can see what's happening.
The demonstrators, belonging to several anti-illegal amnesty groups realize they need to get their message out to the public at large and they realize that what passes for the "news" media in this country will work to suppress their efforts. So they are seeking to be as visible as possible.
Demonstrations are being carried out in major cities. Two in Texas, one in Austin and one in San Antonio, are being carried out in front of the Mexican consulates in those two cities and in Salinas, California a demonstration is being held in front of the office of a Congressman. I'm sure he'll get the message even if he doesn't want to.
Those wanting a list of where demonstrations are being held can check out
http://www.alipac.us
There is a list on that site of all the planned demonstrations as of the afternoon of July 18th.
Check it out, and if there is a city, or an overpass, near you that a demonstration is being held at, go on out and take part. Our Marxist-in-Chief in Washington would love to flood the country will illegal immigrants at the expense of Americans, whom he seems to have no use for. When he said he was going to "fundamentally transform the United States" he wasn't kidding. Had people understood what he meant maybe he would not have gotten elected. Those who understand the Marxist mindset knew what he meant, but nobody wanted to hear it. They were all wrapped up in his "hope and change" balderdash.
One wonders how many Americans will have to be displaced to make room for the flood of illegal aliens he wants here. Just think where the country will go when he manages to give them the vote--and he will manage, one way or another.
Check out the locations for demonstrations and support them if at all possible.
Although the "news" media will try not to give it much coverage there is a big national protest going on over the weekend of July 18-19 all across the country. Demonstrations are being carried out in many states, often on overpasses on Interstate highways so that lots of drivers can see what's happening.
The demonstrators, belonging to several anti-illegal amnesty groups realize they need to get their message out to the public at large and they realize that what passes for the "news" media in this country will work to suppress their efforts. So they are seeking to be as visible as possible.
Demonstrations are being carried out in major cities. Two in Texas, one in Austin and one in San Antonio, are being carried out in front of the Mexican consulates in those two cities and in Salinas, California a demonstration is being held in front of the office of a Congressman. I'm sure he'll get the message even if he doesn't want to.
Those wanting a list of where demonstrations are being held can check out
http://www.alipac.us
There is a list on that site of all the planned demonstrations as of the afternoon of July 18th.
Check it out, and if there is a city, or an overpass, near you that a demonstration is being held at, go on out and take part. Our Marxist-in-Chief in Washington would love to flood the country will illegal immigrants at the expense of Americans, whom he seems to have no use for. When he said he was going to "fundamentally transform the United States" he wasn't kidding. Had people understood what he meant maybe he would not have gotten elected. Those who understand the Marxist mindset knew what he meant, but nobody wanted to hear it. They were all wrapped up in his "hope and change" balderdash.
One wonders how many Americans will have to be displaced to make room for the flood of illegal aliens he wants here. Just think where the country will go when he manages to give them the vote--and he will manage, one way or another.
Check out the locations for demonstrations and support them if at all possible.
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
Who Will Be the Next President? (What difference does it make?)
by Al Benson Jr.
I just read an article on http://www.humanevents.com written by David Limbaugh which asked "Hillary a shoo-in for POTUS?
Mr. Limbaugh says: "I'm probably in some miniscule minority, but I am just not too worried about Hillary Clinton's prospects to become our next president. I sense that people will detect her lack of authenticity and also properly associate her with Obama's failed policies. So far, many have given Hillary a pass on her enabling her husband's serial mistreatment of women in his personal life. She was complicit every step of the way, yet many view her as the victim rather than a co-conspirator." Mr. Limbaugh seems to think that those who viewed Hillary as a victim rather than a co-conspirator will now suddenly wake up and "detect her lack of authenticity." Why? If she fooled them on the first go-round, then why not now.
You would have thought that the public would have learned from Obama's first term just where he was really at (right 'round the Marxist bend) yet they re-elected him for a second term. Of course some creative "vote counting" in certain places might have helped that, plus the fact that the Republicans nominated the weakest possible sister to run against him as they did in 2008. Let's face it, the ruling elite that controls both political parties in this country wanted a second term for Obama so he could finish dismantling the country and they made sure he got it. Who are the "ruling elite" you might ask? Get on Google and look up the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Committee, and the Bilderburgers and see what you find. Go online and read Gary Allen's book "None Dare Call it Conspiracy." It's there and it's a real eyeopener.
Basically, struggling through a year of presidential campaigning in 2016 will be an exercise in futility. No matter which party you vote for you will be getting someone that is CFR-approved. If he, she, or it were not approved by the CFR and the other One World Government groups they would never be nominated in the first place. Folks, it's all a sham, a farce, an exercise in futility to make people think they actually have a choice of who they get for president. We have no real choice. The candidates for both parties are all prepackaged and scripted long ahead of time and the ruling elites know who they are going to foist off on the naive public as the next "president."
And the next president, like the current Marxist-in-Chief, will do exactly what the CFR and the Trilats and Bilderburgers tell he, she, or it to do. The presidents nowadays are about as independent as the fry cook at your local Burger King. They are told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. If they slip the traces like Nixon did, they get "Watergated."
So don't waste your time, effort or money worrying about who the next president will be. That will not be decided by the voters, it will be decided by our ruling elite, so that no matter how we vote, we will get their man and their agenda. As they say, folks, start connecting the dots!
If you want to vote, then vote in local elections or state elections or for Congressman. Right now there are lots of scumbags in Congress that should be voted out (if the elections are honest, and that's always a big IF). Concentrate on your candidates at the local, parish, and county levels. If you can vote for decent people there some of them will eventually go to Washington and then you will have to keep your eye on them there, but at least you will know who they are. Just figure the next president will promote the One World Govt. agenda no matter which party he is in and concentrate on electing people that might be led to try to stop him.
I just read an article on http://www.humanevents.com written by David Limbaugh which asked "Hillary a shoo-in for POTUS?
Mr. Limbaugh says: "I'm probably in some miniscule minority, but I am just not too worried about Hillary Clinton's prospects to become our next president. I sense that people will detect her lack of authenticity and also properly associate her with Obama's failed policies. So far, many have given Hillary a pass on her enabling her husband's serial mistreatment of women in his personal life. She was complicit every step of the way, yet many view her as the victim rather than a co-conspirator." Mr. Limbaugh seems to think that those who viewed Hillary as a victim rather than a co-conspirator will now suddenly wake up and "detect her lack of authenticity." Why? If she fooled them on the first go-round, then why not now.
You would have thought that the public would have learned from Obama's first term just where he was really at (right 'round the Marxist bend) yet they re-elected him for a second term. Of course some creative "vote counting" in certain places might have helped that, plus the fact that the Republicans nominated the weakest possible sister to run against him as they did in 2008. Let's face it, the ruling elite that controls both political parties in this country wanted a second term for Obama so he could finish dismantling the country and they made sure he got it. Who are the "ruling elite" you might ask? Get on Google and look up the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Committee, and the Bilderburgers and see what you find. Go online and read Gary Allen's book "None Dare Call it Conspiracy." It's there and it's a real eyeopener.
Basically, struggling through a year of presidential campaigning in 2016 will be an exercise in futility. No matter which party you vote for you will be getting someone that is CFR-approved. If he, she, or it were not approved by the CFR and the other One World Government groups they would never be nominated in the first place. Folks, it's all a sham, a farce, an exercise in futility to make people think they actually have a choice of who they get for president. We have no real choice. The candidates for both parties are all prepackaged and scripted long ahead of time and the ruling elites know who they are going to foist off on the naive public as the next "president."
And the next president, like the current Marxist-in-Chief, will do exactly what the CFR and the Trilats and Bilderburgers tell he, she, or it to do. The presidents nowadays are about as independent as the fry cook at your local Burger King. They are told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. If they slip the traces like Nixon did, they get "Watergated."
So don't waste your time, effort or money worrying about who the next president will be. That will not be decided by the voters, it will be decided by our ruling elite, so that no matter how we vote, we will get their man and their agenda. As they say, folks, start connecting the dots!
If you want to vote, then vote in local elections or state elections or for Congressman. Right now there are lots of scumbags in Congress that should be voted out (if the elections are honest, and that's always a big IF). Concentrate on your candidates at the local, parish, and county levels. If you can vote for decent people there some of them will eventually go to Washington and then you will have to keep your eye on them there, but at least you will know who they are. Just figure the next president will promote the One World Govt. agenda no matter which party he is in and concentrate on electing people that might be led to try to stop him.
Wednesday, June 04, 2014
The Children of Abraham
by Al Benson Jr.
Long ago God told Abraham, in Genesis 12:3, that God would bless those that blessed him and curse those that cursed him, and that, in him, all nations would be blessed.
Many today take this verse to mean that God will bless or curse the nations in regard to how they deal with the natural, secular nation of Israel. What the verse actually means is that God will bless the nations through His Son, Jesus Christ, and that the nations will be judged based upon their reaction to Christ and His followers. Those who accept Christ as Lord and Saviour will become the spiritual children of Abraham.
Galatians 3:16 tells us that God's promises were made to Abraham and to his seed, which is Christ. Verse 29 of Galatians 3 also informs us that if we accept Christ Jesus as our personal Lord and Saviour then we also become Abraham's seed and heirs according to God's promises which He made to Abraham in Genesis 12:3.
God has said, in effect, that those who respond to the call of His Son and ask His forgiveness for their sins then become the true Israel. Let that thought sink in for a minute. it's probably not what you were taught in Sunday School. It isn't what I was taught. It's probably a new concept to you, and yet, history shows that it is not so new. God's true Israel is not a kingdom made with hands, or with military might, even Jewish military might paid for with US dollars. Rather, it is a spiritual nation. peopled by both Jews and Gentiles, a nation, or Kingdom, created by saving faith in Christ, which God sovereignly imparts to His elect.
In 1st Peter 2:9, Peter calls God's Israel "a royal priesthood, an holy nation," Closer to our own day, Jonathan Edwards preached a sermon called "Sinners in the hand of an angry God." In that sermon he plainly stated that those who are not born again, who have not turned to Christ Jesus for salvation from their sins "are aliens from the commonwealth of Israel." To Edwards it was plain that citizenship in the true Israel since Christ's advent was through faith in Christ.
Let us give thanks that, through Christ, we can become members of the commonwealth of Israel, God's Kingdom, that we can become members of the "holy nation" spoken of in 1st Peter. Abraham rejoiced to see Christ's day and was glad. Can we do differently?
A good little book to read that deals with some of this has been written by Evangelist John L. Bray. It's called "Israel In Bible Prophecy." When I bought it it was $5.00 and could be obtained from John L. Bray Ministry, P O Box 90129, Lakeland, Florida 33804. You might check and see if it's still available.
Long ago God told Abraham, in Genesis 12:3, that God would bless those that blessed him and curse those that cursed him, and that, in him, all nations would be blessed.
Many today take this verse to mean that God will bless or curse the nations in regard to how they deal with the natural, secular nation of Israel. What the verse actually means is that God will bless the nations through His Son, Jesus Christ, and that the nations will be judged based upon their reaction to Christ and His followers. Those who accept Christ as Lord and Saviour will become the spiritual children of Abraham.
Galatians 3:16 tells us that God's promises were made to Abraham and to his seed, which is Christ. Verse 29 of Galatians 3 also informs us that if we accept Christ Jesus as our personal Lord and Saviour then we also become Abraham's seed and heirs according to God's promises which He made to Abraham in Genesis 12:3.
God has said, in effect, that those who respond to the call of His Son and ask His forgiveness for their sins then become the true Israel. Let that thought sink in for a minute. it's probably not what you were taught in Sunday School. It isn't what I was taught. It's probably a new concept to you, and yet, history shows that it is not so new. God's true Israel is not a kingdom made with hands, or with military might, even Jewish military might paid for with US dollars. Rather, it is a spiritual nation. peopled by both Jews and Gentiles, a nation, or Kingdom, created by saving faith in Christ, which God sovereignly imparts to His elect.
In 1st Peter 2:9, Peter calls God's Israel "a royal priesthood, an holy nation," Closer to our own day, Jonathan Edwards preached a sermon called "Sinners in the hand of an angry God." In that sermon he plainly stated that those who are not born again, who have not turned to Christ Jesus for salvation from their sins "are aliens from the commonwealth of Israel." To Edwards it was plain that citizenship in the true Israel since Christ's advent was through faith in Christ.
Let us give thanks that, through Christ, we can become members of the commonwealth of Israel, God's Kingdom, that we can become members of the "holy nation" spoken of in 1st Peter. Abraham rejoiced to see Christ's day and was glad. Can we do differently?
A good little book to read that deals with some of this has been written by Evangelist John L. Bray. It's called "Israel In Bible Prophecy." When I bought it it was $5.00 and could be obtained from John L. Bray Ministry, P O Box 90129, Lakeland, Florida 33804. You might check and see if it's still available.
Thursday, May 29, 2014
The New Soviet States of Amerika and Thought Crime
by Al Benson Jr.
Most of us are familiar with George Orwell's book 1984 in which he mentions "Thoughtcrime"--the thinking of thoughts that Big Brother would not approve of. If Big Brother doesn't approve of it then it must be a crime, right? Or if it isn't yet it soon will be--as soon as the current Regime can either marshal enough votes in Congress to pass a law making it a crime. Short of doing that, an Executive Order might be issued.
The latest on the Obamanite agenda is thought crime--especially as it pertains to Trotskyite "racism" which, in this country, people are being taught is the new unforgivable sin. In the Holy Scriptures Jesus tells us that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the one unforgivable sin, but the present Regime will have none of that Bible-thumping stuff, because their Adviser from on low has revealed to them that the real unforgivable sin is "racism"--well at least "white racism." Black racism, so it has been revealed to them, is really a virtue, but they have to work to stamp out that rotten "white racism" so they can enthrone that virtuous black racism.
And the way to start doing that, according to the "First Lady" in a speech she recently gave at the graduation ceremony at a public brain laundry, is to make sure the kids start monitoring what their parents say regarding race. That way, if the kids hear any adverse comments pertaining to the race question they can immediately spring up from the supper table, landing confidently on the moral high ground, while they commence lecturing their parents on why they shouldn't commit the new unforgivable sin.
One wonders how long it will be before the kids are encouraged to start reporting their parents' conversations to a newly-appointed "Race Commissar" who will then evaluate those conversations to determine whether the parents need to attend mandatory sensitivity training sessions, or possibly a FEMA "re-education" camp to purge their wayward souls from their old reactionary attitudes. And, should they refuse, they just might not make it home again, and the minions of Big Brother can assume the rearing (and brainwashing) of their children. Big Brother would like that.
I recall that, during the reigns of Comrades Stalin and Mao, students were encouraged to monitor their parents' conversations and attitudes, and if the new fledgling Marxists felt their parents were not in line with current Marxist orthodoxy they reported them and the parents were brought up on the carpet to account for their reactionary deviations. The kids were taught in their Marxist public schools (really government schools just like here) that this was what they should do, and many of them did it with pride.
An author, Cheryl Chumley, who has written a book called Police State USA has commented on this. She said, as recorded on http://joemiller.us that "Michelle Obama's push for kids around the nation to monitor their family members for perceived racist comments is just another way the government seeks to inject itself into an area it doesn't really belong--the American home." Well, she's right there.
Chumley sees a very disturbing trend in this country with political figures now singling out private individuals and groups because of their beliefs and using government agencies and public ridicule to intimidate and silence their opponents. All standard Marxist practice. She says this is "...something that belongs in a George Orwell novel, not in the White House..." Theoretically she's right. In actuality however, if you understand this current Regime, this is exactly something that belongs in the White House, because this "White House" is really a "Red House" and this is standard propaganda for Red Houses peopled by Marxists and their syncophants.
We've all gotten used to seeing the First Commissars--oh excuse me, I meant the First Couple, as they point their fingers at "we the people" and lecture us about what we should be doing, with just a bit of condescension. They talk down to us as if we were school children and they were sages with all the wisdom of the world. I suppose we are all supposed to be thankful that they even deign to pay attention to us, because, after all, they are EVERYTHING and we are NOTHING. We only exist to pay for their expensive digs and travel accomodations while they travel around the world apologizing to everyone everywhere for the fact that we are such lowlife's. Makes you wonder whose running the government (hint--we know it ain't Obama). He's just the poster boy for George Soros and the Council on Foreign Relations.
So, if your kids come home from school with big plans to eavesdrop on any conversations you may have where the subject of race might be mentioned, you will know they have taken their cue from Comrade Michelle.
Most of us are familiar with George Orwell's book 1984 in which he mentions "Thoughtcrime"--the thinking of thoughts that Big Brother would not approve of. If Big Brother doesn't approve of it then it must be a crime, right? Or if it isn't yet it soon will be--as soon as the current Regime can either marshal enough votes in Congress to pass a law making it a crime. Short of doing that, an Executive Order might be issued.
The latest on the Obamanite agenda is thought crime--especially as it pertains to Trotskyite "racism" which, in this country, people are being taught is the new unforgivable sin. In the Holy Scriptures Jesus tells us that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the one unforgivable sin, but the present Regime will have none of that Bible-thumping stuff, because their Adviser from on low has revealed to them that the real unforgivable sin is "racism"--well at least "white racism." Black racism, so it has been revealed to them, is really a virtue, but they have to work to stamp out that rotten "white racism" so they can enthrone that virtuous black racism.
And the way to start doing that, according to the "First Lady" in a speech she recently gave at the graduation ceremony at a public brain laundry, is to make sure the kids start monitoring what their parents say regarding race. That way, if the kids hear any adverse comments pertaining to the race question they can immediately spring up from the supper table, landing confidently on the moral high ground, while they commence lecturing their parents on why they shouldn't commit the new unforgivable sin.
One wonders how long it will be before the kids are encouraged to start reporting their parents' conversations to a newly-appointed "Race Commissar" who will then evaluate those conversations to determine whether the parents need to attend mandatory sensitivity training sessions, or possibly a FEMA "re-education" camp to purge their wayward souls from their old reactionary attitudes. And, should they refuse, they just might not make it home again, and the minions of Big Brother can assume the rearing (and brainwashing) of their children. Big Brother would like that.
I recall that, during the reigns of Comrades Stalin and Mao, students were encouraged to monitor their parents' conversations and attitudes, and if the new fledgling Marxists felt their parents were not in line with current Marxist orthodoxy they reported them and the parents were brought up on the carpet to account for their reactionary deviations. The kids were taught in their Marxist public schools (really government schools just like here) that this was what they should do, and many of them did it with pride.
An author, Cheryl Chumley, who has written a book called Police State USA has commented on this. She said, as recorded on http://joemiller.us that "Michelle Obama's push for kids around the nation to monitor their family members for perceived racist comments is just another way the government seeks to inject itself into an area it doesn't really belong--the American home." Well, she's right there.
Chumley sees a very disturbing trend in this country with political figures now singling out private individuals and groups because of their beliefs and using government agencies and public ridicule to intimidate and silence their opponents. All standard Marxist practice. She says this is "...something that belongs in a George Orwell novel, not in the White House..." Theoretically she's right. In actuality however, if you understand this current Regime, this is exactly something that belongs in the White House, because this "White House" is really a "Red House" and this is standard propaganda for Red Houses peopled by Marxists and their syncophants.
We've all gotten used to seeing the First Commissars--oh excuse me, I meant the First Couple, as they point their fingers at "we the people" and lecture us about what we should be doing, with just a bit of condescension. They talk down to us as if we were school children and they were sages with all the wisdom of the world. I suppose we are all supposed to be thankful that they even deign to pay attention to us, because, after all, they are EVERYTHING and we are NOTHING. We only exist to pay for their expensive digs and travel accomodations while they travel around the world apologizing to everyone everywhere for the fact that we are such lowlife's. Makes you wonder whose running the government (hint--we know it ain't Obama). He's just the poster boy for George Soros and the Council on Foreign Relations.
So, if your kids come home from school with big plans to eavesdrop on any conversations you may have where the subject of race might be mentioned, you will know they have taken their cue from Comrade Michelle.
Monday, May 19, 2014
One Major Southern Problem--Public Schools, Part 2
by Al Benson Jr.
Horace Mann received much support in his endeavor to kill the influence of Christian education from people like Robert Owen, the British socialist who came to this country and founded the socialist colony at New Harmony, Indiana in the late 1820s. Owen was the man whose socialist scheme in Indiana "lighted up (Abraham) Lincoln's heart" according to Lincoln's biographer, Carl Sandburg, himself a socialist.
So the foundation of public education in this country was clearly anti-Christian--and if that was the case in the beginning, then how, pray tell, do you get it back to the "good old days?" There never were any "good old days" in public education. All there were, if you perceive events correctly, were times years ago when the anti-Christianity and socialism were a little less evident than now, but they were still there. If the root of the tree is rotten, you can't improve it by lopping off a few small branches and labeling it "school reform." Unfortunately, most Christians in the last 160 years have never figured that out.
After the public school system had operated in Yankeeland for about thirty years, one generation, along came the War of Northern Aggression. When the shooting part of that war was over, then what is euphemistically called "reconstruction" was instituted, starting in the South--and guess what came South with the Carpetbaggers? You got it--the public school system, complete with Yankee school teachers and textbooks, all designed to show the benighted South the path of true salvation--not through Jesus, but through the State. Up until that point, you hadn't had a public school "system" in the South. Here and there you had parentally-controlled local schools, and that was it because that was enough. As part of the Yankee/Marxist "reconstruction" you got the public school system you have all come to know and love.
I have one question no one has yet been able to answer. Most Southern folks I know that know anything at all, hate "reconstruction" and justifiably so. I hate it and what it did to the South, and I was born in the North. If you hate "reconstruction" why do you love public schools? They are a major part of what you profess to hate. Have folks in the South finally been brainwashed to the point where they now love "Big Brother?"
You will never even begin to preserve your culture, history, and heritage in any lasting way until you start to realize what the public school brainlaundering has done to you and your kids and you start taking them out of public schools and either putting them in Christian schools or teaching them at home. It's hard for folks to grasp this because they were brainwashed in the exact same way their kids are being brainwashed now.
However, we need to ask the Lord's help so we can begin to think outside the public school box. I would exhort folks to think about this and to ask the guidance of the Holy Spirit as they seek to deal with what they need to do regarding the education of their children.
I recently read an article that asked the question, "Are Christians who put their kids in public schools committing a sin?" The upshot of the article was that, if they are unaware of what the public schools are all about, then, no, they are not, but if they have some knowledge of what the public schools are and still choose to leave their kids in them, then they have a major problem. There are many instances where parents have no other alternative. But there are also many instances where parents do have the possibility of Christian alternatives and they just don't bother, or worse, yet, because their kids are in public school, they stand up and defend public education. Again, they don't know the history of public education in this country, or they don't want to know it. Either way they have a problem they will, at some point, have to deal with.
Either way, the South has to deal with the public education problem. If it does not, it will cease to exist as a viable entity and a culture that had a Christian worldview will be lost forever.
Taken in part from The Confederate Sentry, Volume 19, Number 3, AD 2013,
The publication of the Confederate Society of America
Horace Mann received much support in his endeavor to kill the influence of Christian education from people like Robert Owen, the British socialist who came to this country and founded the socialist colony at New Harmony, Indiana in the late 1820s. Owen was the man whose socialist scheme in Indiana "lighted up (Abraham) Lincoln's heart" according to Lincoln's biographer, Carl Sandburg, himself a socialist.
So the foundation of public education in this country was clearly anti-Christian--and if that was the case in the beginning, then how, pray tell, do you get it back to the "good old days?" There never were any "good old days" in public education. All there were, if you perceive events correctly, were times years ago when the anti-Christianity and socialism were a little less evident than now, but they were still there. If the root of the tree is rotten, you can't improve it by lopping off a few small branches and labeling it "school reform." Unfortunately, most Christians in the last 160 years have never figured that out.
After the public school system had operated in Yankeeland for about thirty years, one generation, along came the War of Northern Aggression. When the shooting part of that war was over, then what is euphemistically called "reconstruction" was instituted, starting in the South--and guess what came South with the Carpetbaggers? You got it--the public school system, complete with Yankee school teachers and textbooks, all designed to show the benighted South the path of true salvation--not through Jesus, but through the State. Up until that point, you hadn't had a public school "system" in the South. Here and there you had parentally-controlled local schools, and that was it because that was enough. As part of the Yankee/Marxist "reconstruction" you got the public school system you have all come to know and love.
I have one question no one has yet been able to answer. Most Southern folks I know that know anything at all, hate "reconstruction" and justifiably so. I hate it and what it did to the South, and I was born in the North. If you hate "reconstruction" why do you love public schools? They are a major part of what you profess to hate. Have folks in the South finally been brainwashed to the point where they now love "Big Brother?"
You will never even begin to preserve your culture, history, and heritage in any lasting way until you start to realize what the public school brainlaundering has done to you and your kids and you start taking them out of public schools and either putting them in Christian schools or teaching them at home. It's hard for folks to grasp this because they were brainwashed in the exact same way their kids are being brainwashed now.
However, we need to ask the Lord's help so we can begin to think outside the public school box. I would exhort folks to think about this and to ask the guidance of the Holy Spirit as they seek to deal with what they need to do regarding the education of their children.
I recently read an article that asked the question, "Are Christians who put their kids in public schools committing a sin?" The upshot of the article was that, if they are unaware of what the public schools are all about, then, no, they are not, but if they have some knowledge of what the public schools are and still choose to leave their kids in them, then they have a major problem. There are many instances where parents have no other alternative. But there are also many instances where parents do have the possibility of Christian alternatives and they just don't bother, or worse, yet, because their kids are in public school, they stand up and defend public education. Again, they don't know the history of public education in this country, or they don't want to know it. Either way they have a problem they will, at some point, have to deal with.
Either way, the South has to deal with the public education problem. If it does not, it will cease to exist as a viable entity and a culture that had a Christian worldview will be lost forever.
Taken in part from The Confederate Sentry, Volume 19, Number 3, AD 2013,
The publication of the Confederate Society of America
Saturday, May 17, 2014
One Major Southern Problem--Public Schools
by Al Benson Jr.
Although I am writing this, frankly, I don't expect very many people will want to pay much attention to it. You see, it will go against the grain of the propaganda they have been fed and ingested for well over the past century or so, and to do something about the problem would involve personal responsibility, and most folks today flee personal responsibility as they would the plague.
The small North Louisiana town I live in thinks the local public schools there are the greatest thing since sliced bread. The possibility that the local public schools there may be brainwashing their children is the last thing they want to hear, and so if you dare to approach the subject they just tune you out. "Don't confuse me with the facts, please." It's so much better to remain ignorant, then I don't have to DO anything. This is the typical attitude in town and cities across the South, and the rest of the country, too.
The public school is sacrosanct. It is the sacred cow. The only time anyone ever dares question it is if their kid wears a Confederate flag tee shirt to school and gets sent home for that. The black kid next to him may have a Malcolm X tee shirt on, but that's okay. It gets an automatic pass, just like the tee shirt with the "gay pride" stuff all over it. These are okay, by public school standards today, but your kid's Confederate flag tee shirt has to come off, immediately if not sooner. If the parents decide to protest this, the result is usually far from satisfactory.
I've talked with folks whose kids or grandkids come home from public school spouting anti-Confederate propaganda about how the Confederate flag is "racist." I despise the term "racist" because it is of Trotskyite origin and every time we use it we are playing on our opponents' turf. Same thing when we argue with the local public school bureaucrat about our kid's Confederate flag tee shirt--we are playing on their turf and it's a battle we will seldom win. They already know that. We haven't figured it out yet.
Rather than going through an exercise in exasperation, what we should start doing is just taking the kids out of public school. What we need to do when a problem arises is to just go and state our position politely and then inform the local education commisar "my child will not be returning to your school again." Don't fuss, fume, or get ticked off--the educrat likes that and it gives him or her a reason to put their thumb down on you as a "recalcitrant parent." So don't fuss, just take the kid out. End of conversation! That will derpive the local school district of, depending on where you live, anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 per year in federal money. And if there were a big enough flap over Confederate symbols in one particular area and ten people had the guts to remove their kids from the public system, you can see where that would cost the local public brain laundry some serious money.
Most Southern folks seem to have the opinion that the local public school is second cousin to God, motherhood and apple pie--and it just ain't so. It never was. People love to prattle about the "good old days" when they went to public school and how much better it would be if we could just go back to that. Sorry to disillusion you, but those "good old days" never really existed. The public school's foundations were bad from day one. Public schools, as we now have them, were originally started up in New England, Massachusetts to be specific. The major mover and shaker in starting them was a man named Horace Mann. You may even have seen schools named after him, I have. But do you really know doodly sqat about him?
Horace Mann was a Unitarian. Know what that is? Know what Unitarians believe? They are people, calling themselves Christians, who do not recognize the Deity of Jesus Christ, who think Jesus may have been a great moral example and teacher, but definitely not the Son of God. What really bothered Mann was the influence of church schools in his area. In fact, that bothered him so much that he sought to come up with a way to counteract it.
He didn't think kids should be influenced by Christian education, that they would be better off in "secular" (humanist) schools, run by the state and regulated by the state, where Christian ideas and influence could be muted, and eventually done away with.
To be continued.
Reprinted from The Confederate Sentry, Vol. 19, Number 3, 2013
Although I am writing this, frankly, I don't expect very many people will want to pay much attention to it. You see, it will go against the grain of the propaganda they have been fed and ingested for well over the past century or so, and to do something about the problem would involve personal responsibility, and most folks today flee personal responsibility as they would the plague.
The small North Louisiana town I live in thinks the local public schools there are the greatest thing since sliced bread. The possibility that the local public schools there may be brainwashing their children is the last thing they want to hear, and so if you dare to approach the subject they just tune you out. "Don't confuse me with the facts, please." It's so much better to remain ignorant, then I don't have to DO anything. This is the typical attitude in town and cities across the South, and the rest of the country, too.
The public school is sacrosanct. It is the sacred cow. The only time anyone ever dares question it is if their kid wears a Confederate flag tee shirt to school and gets sent home for that. The black kid next to him may have a Malcolm X tee shirt on, but that's okay. It gets an automatic pass, just like the tee shirt with the "gay pride" stuff all over it. These are okay, by public school standards today, but your kid's Confederate flag tee shirt has to come off, immediately if not sooner. If the parents decide to protest this, the result is usually far from satisfactory.
I've talked with folks whose kids or grandkids come home from public school spouting anti-Confederate propaganda about how the Confederate flag is "racist." I despise the term "racist" because it is of Trotskyite origin and every time we use it we are playing on our opponents' turf. Same thing when we argue with the local public school bureaucrat about our kid's Confederate flag tee shirt--we are playing on their turf and it's a battle we will seldom win. They already know that. We haven't figured it out yet.
Rather than going through an exercise in exasperation, what we should start doing is just taking the kids out of public school. What we need to do when a problem arises is to just go and state our position politely and then inform the local education commisar "my child will not be returning to your school again." Don't fuss, fume, or get ticked off--the educrat likes that and it gives him or her a reason to put their thumb down on you as a "recalcitrant parent." So don't fuss, just take the kid out. End of conversation! That will derpive the local school district of, depending on where you live, anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 per year in federal money. And if there were a big enough flap over Confederate symbols in one particular area and ten people had the guts to remove their kids from the public system, you can see where that would cost the local public brain laundry some serious money.
Most Southern folks seem to have the opinion that the local public school is second cousin to God, motherhood and apple pie--and it just ain't so. It never was. People love to prattle about the "good old days" when they went to public school and how much better it would be if we could just go back to that. Sorry to disillusion you, but those "good old days" never really existed. The public school's foundations were bad from day one. Public schools, as we now have them, were originally started up in New England, Massachusetts to be specific. The major mover and shaker in starting them was a man named Horace Mann. You may even have seen schools named after him, I have. But do you really know doodly sqat about him?
Horace Mann was a Unitarian. Know what that is? Know what Unitarians believe? They are people, calling themselves Christians, who do not recognize the Deity of Jesus Christ, who think Jesus may have been a great moral example and teacher, but definitely not the Son of God. What really bothered Mann was the influence of church schools in his area. In fact, that bothered him so much that he sought to come up with a way to counteract it.
He didn't think kids should be influenced by Christian education, that they would be better off in "secular" (humanist) schools, run by the state and regulated by the state, where Christian ideas and influence could be muted, and eventually done away with.
To be continued.
Reprinted from The Confederate Sentry, Vol. 19, Number 3, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)