Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Is the Next Presidential Election Nothing More Than a Fixed Political Horse Race?

by Al Benson Jr.


Just read an article on Newsmax.com today telling about how a Zogby Poll shows that the voters think Donald Trump would do a better job as president than would Hillary Clinton, otherwise referred to as "Hillary the un-indicted." Lots of polls have shown Trump in the lead as of late and I have to admit that he is saying lots of things many of us agree with, not all, but many.  He is an excellent barometer to reflect how much of the American public has come to feel, accurately so, that the Ruling Elite is stiffing us today. And the Ruling Elite--the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group realize how dissatisfied  the public has become with what passes for real government in our day.

Only problem is, "those people" have spent lots of money and literally generations of time diligently getting us into the sorry shape we are now in and they are not about to let someone like Trump, if he really is a lone wolf, win an election that will set their timetable back.  Ron Paul would have sought to do that back in 2012 and they made sure that didn't happen. If Trump is really on the level they will do the same thing on this go-round. They can't afford to let him get in there and gum up the agenda they and their fathers and grandfathers have worked so diligently to put in place.

Back on April 14, 2015 I did an article on my other blog spot http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com  which I entitled Has the Next President Already Been Chosen--and is the election just going through the motions?  I noted in that article that radio talk show host Michael Savage had stated that: "The Bilderbergs met in Davos,  and the decision was made that Hillary Clinton will be the next president.  Romney was doing too well in the polls, so they threw him out. They want to make sure that another Bush--or an incompetent moron like Rubio--will be chosen to lead the Republicans, to ensure that Hillary becomes president." My April 14, 2015 article must have struck a responsive chord somewhere, because a year and eight months after I wrote it, it is still getting a bunch of views every week, many more than some of the other articles that have come and gone since then.

What brought all this to mind again was an article I just read on www.infowars.com  on January 26th for this year. The headline for this one was: Insider: It Doesn't Matter About Trump, 'Hillary Will Win.'
The article began with this: "Highly influential CEO Martin Sorrell suggests that the outcome of the 2016 presidential election has already been decided, remarking, 'It doesn't matter who the Republicans put up..Hillary will win'." Infowars noted that: "Sorrell's comments are in line with similar sentiments expressed by globalists at the recent Davos confab...According to a Reuters report, financial elitists are 'alarmed' at the prospect of Trump being the Republican nominee, although they still expect his campaign to falter. Harvard University's Niall Ferguson told Reuters that Trump's chances 'could be over before Super Tuesday'." Now how would he know something like that? Some little bird been chirping in his ear?

Author and columnist Ann Coulter, in a column on January 20th wrote that: "We never had total war against a candidate like we're seeing with Donald Trump. All the elements of national media are uniting to stop him. Look for a fake Trump scandal  to break--probably from a conservative news outlet--right before the Iowa caucus."

As a candidate, I hadn't thought all that much about Trump one way or the other. I had figured he was just part of the Establishment's stable of candidates like all the rest. Maybe inserted in there to give the primaries a little pzazz, to possibly enthrall a voting public that's getting a little tired of all this and that is finally beginning to realize that, no matter who wins, they lose! However, he has stuck in there longer than I thought he would, and the fact that everybody, both socialists (Democrats) and conservatives seem to hate his guts, including the "news" media, both socialist and conservative, does make one wonder. If he's really genuine (I love his stands on illegal aliens and Middle-Eastern terrorists and the Second Amendment) what does that say about the moral bankruptcy  of what we mistakenly refer to as the "conservative" movement in this country? What it says is that, in reality the same people control the "conservatives" that control the socialists--the CFR, the Trilateralists, and Bilderbergers. No matter what party label they wear they all work for the same bosses!

The main point to this is that, in my opinion, many of our elections are a sham, a game played to fool the public so they will not realize that the Ruling Elite in Washington, New York and London is screwing them and that the elitist One World Government agenda will go forward no matter who gets into the White House. The presidential elections are a farce anymore and the people taking part in these "debates" ought to get Oscars--oh, sorry, I forget, the Oscars are too "white" anymore. Maybe we should start handing out "Barack Obama Diversity Awards" instead. That might appease the perpetually offended--for awhile.

I would encourage people to start doing a bit of homework on some of these candidates. You can find enough on the Internet if you "hunt and peck" around a little to make you shudder at where they are really coming from. You might just find enough to cause you to question if a vote for president  is really even worth the effort.

Thursday, January 14, 2016

Hey Bernie--Don't Apologize For Me!

by Al Benson Jr.

Just read an interesting article earlier this week on www.godfatherpolitics.com  that mentioned how that lovable old socialist Bernie Sanders wants all of us white folks to apologize for slavery in America. You have to wonder if he's looking to steal black votes from Hillary or exactly what his game is.

Seems like the blame whitey for everything game hasn't been doing real well lately so maybe he feels as though he has to help it along. Some white folks are beginning to get a little ticked off at seeing the flags and symbols of their culture and heritage being constantly attacked and smeared and they are responding with Confederate flags on their flag poles and on the backs of their trucks and with rallies where everyone carries a Confederate flag of some kind.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the vast majority of the politicians in both parties hate our guts but they can't come right out and say it. How it must agitate them to have to bite their tongues when they are forced to give speeches or attend town meetings where they actually have to talk to us rubes in flyover country because, even with some of the "creative voting" we now have they still need our votes to get back in so they can continue to feed at the trough that we pay to keep full for them.

So when they can't tell us what they really think, the only thing left for them to do is to get back at us by trying to lay a guilt trip on us. We haven't been "compassionate" enough to minorities or we haven't grovelled sufficiently at the foot of the gods of political correctness (cultural Marxists) and we haven't gladly volunteered to pay unending "reparations" for slavery, and on and on, the socialists and Marxists continue the litany of our shortcomings! It all gets a little tedious after awhile.

Now Bernie wants all of us white Americans to apologize for slavery (again). Bernie, if you'll humbly pardon my saying it, you are, as the British say "right 'round the bend." My ancestors came here, most of them, from North England and Scotland, in the 1880s so we never owned slaves during the War of Northern Aggression--not that it would have made any difference anyway. So, Bernie, you'll have to pardon me if I don't feel real guilty about the slavery issue.  As long as you are spreading the guilt around, what about those black African chiefs that sold their own people to slave traders? Or what about free blacks in this country that owned slaves? Any guilt for them? I didn't think so, just for us white folks, right?

So now you want us to feel guilty because  some black folks don't have as much as we do right? Tell you something, Bernie, my wife and I drive around in a 17 year old car because that's all we can afford. Most of the blacks I know here in North Louisiana have got much newer and better cars than the one we have. And the few that I run into that try to talk to me about "white privilege"  are a little put off when I tell them how old our car is compared to what they are driving. At that point they don't have much more to say. They work at changing the subject, which, somehow, doesn't solve the problem.

So let's look briefly at some of these downtrodden black folks. What about Oprah? She's got to be one of the wealthiest people in the world. If we are going to abide by your old socialist credo about redistribution of the wealth then maybe she should give some of us poor white folks some of what she's got. We don't always have all we could use and she's got more than she needs by a long shot--so what about a little redistribution of the wealth there? Oh, I see, it doesn't work that way does it?

When you and your socialist and Marxist friends finish with your anti-white diatribes we are all contritely supposed to line up with silver in our palms right?  Well, Bernie, you're white, at least from the photos I have seen you look white, and you've got more than most of us have got. So if we are going to play the "redistribution of the wealth" game it seems to me that you should get at the head of the line because you've got much more wealth to be redistributed than most of us have.

In fact, as a good socialist, you should be out there thinking about where you can give most of yours away, because if you want equal income redistribution for us, then you, as a good socialist, should lead by example shouldn't you? You and Hillary and most of the people in this current regime are all socialists and/or Marxists of one stripe or another and yet it seems to me that you all have lots more money than us poor folks. So why aren't you all spreading your wealth around to help the poor and needy--and I don't mean by passing another welfare bill in Congress that we, not you, will be paying for, I mean by reaching down into your own pockets and really digging deep to enable the poor and downtrodden to lift themselves up by your bootstraps. Isn't that what good socialists do?

You could start off by giving up those fat congressional pay raises that are always voted for at 1 a.m. in the morning, by voice votes, so that we don't know how many of you have "appropriated" money from us to keep your standard of living way, way above ours. How about passing up those big congressional vacations that we the people end up paying for? How about doing away with all those congressional perks that we pay for? If I didn't know better it would seem to me that your socialist "redistribution of the wealth" program is a one-way street. We pay and you "redistribute" to your friends and business colleagues.

Bernie, I don't know how to break it to you any gentler than this--I am not about to feel guilty over slavery I had nothing to do with. I am not about to be ashamed of the culture and heritage of the part of the country I live in.  I won't play that game--and neither should anyone else. However, if you want to play it, let me ask you a question. Since you are from New England, and just about all the ships that carried slaves to this country originated in New England, do you feel guilty enough to be willing to take your fat bankroll out of your pocket and hand it to the race-baiters so you can assuage your personal guilt for the slave trade?  I didn't think so!

Wednesday, January 06, 2016

Our Would-be Dictator Wants to Confiscate Your Guns ASAP

by Al Benson Jr.

Toward the end of last year our Marxist-in-Chief warned us that he was coming after the guns in 2016. For once he didn't obfuscate or prevaricate. He told us the truth. Such a novelty! Oh, he didn't couch it in quite those terms but the meaning was clear. He's talking now about how to prevent more "gun violence" when there are already laws on the books covering all the situations he is supposedly concerned about. He gave a news conference today (1/5/16) where he shed alligator tears for the camera about all those poor kids killed by guns. Apparently, though, he has no tears for all those unborn kids killed by abortion. After all, that's not on the leftist agenda. His performance was so convincing he even fooled Donald Trump, who said he thought Obama was sincere with his tears. Maybe Mr. Trump doesn't fully understand the Marxist mindset.

Supposedly all Obama wants to do is implement background checks so your guns will now have to be registered with the feds, no matter how, when, or where you got them. Folks, lets quit trying to kid everybody and cut to the chase! He wants to confiscate the guns, ALL the guns. In essence he wants to nullify the Second Amendment. Something else the "news" media hasn't seen fit to inform you of showed up on an Infowars.com article, also on January 5th is the real possibility that, according to Obama's new executive orders on guns "Americans critical of government can lose gun rights due to executive order." The Infowars article noted that: "Americans critical of government could have their Second Amendment rights restricted if psychologists diagnose them with 'Oppositional Defiant Disorder' or a similar diagnosis as a result of Obama's new gun control executive action." Not only is he working at gutting the Second Amendment but he is also working at gutting the First Amendment.

House Speaker Paul Ryan sounded oh so good when he said that Obama was again exceeding his authority. He said: "While we don't yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will." I just wonder, Mr. Ryan, if all this ever gets to some kind of vote in the House, will you end up caving in like you did on the last funding bill, you remember, where the Republicans promised to defund Planned Parenthood and then gave Obama the money for it anyway? If that's your idea of opposition I can hardly wait to see what you will do with an Obama gun control/confiscation bill.

After watching the political scene for over 40 years now I have figured out that there are really no accidents in politics and  very few coincidences. The "coincidence" of Obama's new gun control/confiscation initiative  coming right on the heels of this militia takeover of government property out in Oregon really makes me wonder if that situation, regardless of the sincerity of most of the militia folks, hasn't been, somehow, false-flagged to give the president some added ammunition for his latest confiscation effort.  After all, the killings in all those gun-free zones didn't seem to be doing it. So how about something like this Oregon situation where you get to promote gun control, take a healthy slash at both the First and Second Amendments, and knock the militia folks down a peg or two. This has to be a situation that would make any Marxist would-be dictator absolutely salivate!

The Gun Owners of America will probably take this to court. I wish them well. I know with them that you will at least get a decent effort to preserve Second Amendment rights. Some other groups I am not quite so sure of. I got a petition online from some Republican committee wanting me to sign a petition telling Obama we disapprove of what he's doing here. There's your "loyal opposition" for you. Do those people actually think a petition will make any difference to Obama? Well, not really, but getting people to do that siphons off lots of potential resistance that might be more effectively used in some other area.

We need to inundate our Congressmen with calls and letters and emails letting them know how really ticked off we are at this power grab and do the same with letters to the editors of your local papers. They'll never print them all but they will be aware that there is a groundswell of opposition  out there and they need to be reminded that the American people are still somewhat awake and haven't all bought the BF (bovine fertilizer) that Washington and many of our state capitals keep trying to throw in our faces. As for the folks with guns, I'm not going to tell them what to do--they should already know. The Governor of Texas has already told Obama what to do. Let's hope the rest of the States, at least in the South and West, will do the same.

Saturday, January 02, 2016

Deleting History Is Now More Important Than Making It

by Al Benson Jr.

Just this evening I saw a sign from someone's Facebook page that read: "Deleting history is now more important than making it." In the context of today's politically correct (cultural Marxist) climate I could not do other than to agree with that sentiment. It so completely fits the attempted ethnic cleaning campaign now being perpetrated in this country, most particularly in the South.

Many of those who were responsible for making history in the South have been denounced by the cultural Marxists (who ARE Marxists) and their disciples are busily engaged in deleting any memory of them, their culture, their symbols and seeking to replace these with creatures of their own leftist trinity--liberals, socialists, and communists. I've heard talk, don't how accurate it is, that they now want to take Andrew Jackson off the twenty dollar bill and one possible replacement for him that has been suggested is Rosa Parks. Before the women of America cheer about that I would suggest they do  a little homework as to the background of Rose Parks. You can find info about her on the Internet. It hasn't all been removed yet and thrown down the memory hole. To say that Ms. Parks is a creature of the left is putting it mildly.

I just read an article in Chronicles magazine for June, 2015 written by Corresponding editor Wayne Allensworth which dealt with some of our recent past. Toward the end of the article Mr. Allensworth made a couple of  penetrating comments about the past (which in many instances really isn't the past).

In referring to the magazine he is writing for he says: "But Chronicles is not about simple nostalgia, for a remembered past is the only basis any of us can have for thinking about the future...The past, or the best of it, is our guide, for it is the only guide we can have, and informed by that past, we stand at least a chance of hanging on to some things of great value that should be kept and remembered, cultivated, and used again as the ongoing disaster in progress plays out."

Think about it this way--if the cultural Marxists manage, here in the South, to take away your real past and substitute for it some Marxist appendage you would never recognize, how will that affect your children and grandchildren when what they need to know about their past is no longer available? You see there is a generational aspect to all this ethnic cleansing that most folks, even Christians, have not been trained or taught to think about. If the past is part of your guide to the future and you have no real past except what has been foisted upon you by the leftist culture-benders, where do you or your children go from there?

This question is applicable in the theological realm also (since all things are theological). How long will it be before the cultural Marxists get around to preaching that, since the Bible has a past they can't agree with, that it needs to be "reinterpreted?" Those commandments about no stealing and not coveting what belongs to your neighbor are really outdated in this new modern society where "redistribution of the wealth" has become the new "commandment." Actually the cultural and theological Marxists have already been at work in the Church inserting the premises of the left into current evangelical thinking and labeling it "compassionate Christianity." They can get by with this because most Christians have so little real grasp of history that they don't know the difference. And if the Marxist dresses up his agenda with biblical terminology then they never catch on. Will they end up "reinterpreting" Jesus as some sort of leftist revolutionary who came to take from the rich and give to the poor, rather than how He is Scripturally defined in John 14:6? If you've heard some of the sermons I have over the years you will be forced to conclude that they have been working on this project, slowly and quietly, for decades. Does that fact begin to give you any indication as to why the Church is often in the chaotic confusion that parts of it displays today?

When your view of the past is faulty then you have no guide by which to get the future right. They can change your history, your theology, all of it, and you won't know the difference!

Christians today need to stand up, start doing the homework, and learn to resist and expose this. Christians in the South need to do the same in regard to the flags and symbols that are both part of their faith and culture, because if you let them change your history, what do you pass on to your descendants? You may think I'm off the wall, but you had better start thinking and praying about this because it's happening right now, and how will you account to the Lord for having done nothing?