Immigration destroys culture

It's fascinating to see that so many people still stubbornly clinging to outmoded concepts like Magic Dirt, Melting Pot, and Propositional Nation when all three ideas have been thoroughly rendered null and void by the ongoing mass movement of peoples and the dyscivic behavior of the invaders:

An immigrant group based in Bern has called for the emblematic white cross to be removed from the Swiss national flag because as a Christian symbol it "no longer corresponds to today's multicultural Switzerland."

Ivica Petrusic, the vice president of Second@s Plus, a lobbying group that represents mostly Muslim second-generation foreigners in Switzerland (who colloquially are known as secondos) says the group will launch a nationwide campaign in October to ask Swiss citizens to consider adopting a flag that is less offensive to Muslim immigrants.

In a September 18 interview with the Swiss newspaper Aargauer Zeitung, Petrusic said the cross has a Christian background and while the Christian roots of Switzerland should be respected, "it is necessary to separate church and state" because "Switzerland today has a great religious and cultural diversity. One has to ask if the State wants to continue building up a symbol in which many people no longer believe."

In the interview, Petrusic said Switzerland needs new symbols with which everyone, including non-Christians, can identify. As an alternative to the current Swiss flag, Petrusic proposed the former flag of the Helvetic Republic (see image here) which was officially introduced in 1799 and consisted of green, red and yellow colors. "Those colors are similar to the current flags of Bolivia and Ghana and would represent a more progressive and open-minded Switzerland," Petrusic said.

The proposal to change the Swiss flag has been met with outrage across the political spectrum and is sure to fuel anti-immigrant sentiments in Switzerland.

I tend to doubt this unexpected public statement by the senior commander of the Swiss Armed Forces is entirely unrelated to those sentiments.

Swiss army chief André Blattmann warned, in a Swiss newspaper article on Sunday, the risks of social unrest in Europe are soaring. Recalling the experience of 1939/1945, Blattman fears the increasing aggression in public discourse is an explosively hazardous situation, and advises the Swiss people to arm themselves and warns that the basis for Swiss prosperity is "being called into question."

When even military commanders are telling the people to gun up, war is on the way.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/12/immigration-and-culture.html

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2449/immigrants-swiss-flag-cross

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-30/swiss-army-chief-warns-social-unrest-calls-upon-citizens-arm-themselves

Get Ready For Racial Quotas On Your Neighborhood - By Georgi Boorman

President Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development is plotting a power grab under a new rule that came into effect this past July, and we have the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on disparate impact in housing policy to thank for it.

HUD intends to insert itself into local zoning efforts through the AFFH (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing) program to push affirmative action in housing policy, directing HUD grant recipients to “affirmatively further the Act’s goals of promoting fair housing and equal opportunity.”

But former elected officials Ken Blackwell and Rick Manning argue the “AFFH rule seeks to radically reinvent local zoning laws in the United States – reengineering America’s neighborhoods based on racial and ethnic quotas. Under the rule’s assessment tool, local governments are required to ‘identify neighborhoods or areas in the jurisdiction and region where racial/ethnic groups are segregated.’”………..

The federal regulatory state preys on and bullies lower levels of government because the precedent for how we interpret and follow (or, more likely, ignore and obfuscate) laws has been set: just as the Supreme Court read into and manipulated language from the Civil Rights Act, so, too, HUD reads into and manipulates the court’s decision.

The Inclusive Communities ruling is just one example of the great manipulation of the Left, and how blotting out a few phrases, shifting the meaning of a few words, beget still more reimagined rules and new tools to power the federal social justice machine. Words serve their ends until they don’t; intent serves their purpose until it gets in the way.

The Supreme Court’s justification of disparate impact leaves us wondering what laws will they manipulate next, and what new federal powers will arise from them?

Full text at: Get Ready For Racial Quotas On Your Neighborhood

Texas Mom Says She’ll Home School Her Child After The ‘Truly Frightening’ Thing a Teacher Told Her - by Gina Cassini

A Texas Mom was so “horrified” by what her child’s kindergarten teacher said that she is planning on home-schooling her daughter after Christmas break.

And it should chill other parents to the core — Common Core, that is.

Cassidy Vines recently began noticing a change in her daughter’s behavior. The kindergartner began to “snap” at her mother when she tried correcting the little girl’s homework.   “She told me that I was her mommy, not her teacher.”

Mrs. Vines, in a stunning interview on Glenn Beck’s radio program, said that a few days after her daughter first snapped at her, she started pronouncing a word incorrectly. Vines corrected her daughter “in the most gentle way possible,” but her daughter broke down crying, saying “that’s how she was taught, and I can’t tell her something different because I’m a mommy, not a teacher.”

Horrified, she asked her daughter,  “Is somebody telling you this at school?”

“She said, ‘Yes, I’m only allowed to learn from my teacher,’” Vines remarked.

As recounted on TheBlaze, Vines requested to meet with the teacher several times, but said she never got a response.

So she went to her routine parent-teacher conference “armed with a slew of questions,” hoping her daughter had misunderstood what was being said at school.

Vines said she explained what was happening, and kept waiting for the teacher to deny it, but it never happened.

“[The teacher] goes on to tell me that they try to discourage parents from introducing contradictory concepts to ‘our’ children,” Vines said. “Our children. As in the school’s children? I was a little baffled. And so when I started talking about my daughter, I emphasized mydaughter. So I asked her, ‘Am I not allowed to help her with her homework?’”

Vines was shocked when the teacher responded that no, they “don’t want parents confusing the kids.”

It got worse. Much worse:

Vines wrote on Glenn Beck’s Facebook wall about the incident, sharing how, in the same parent-teacher conference, the teacher said in front of several parents that the pilgrims were “essentially America’s first terrorists.”

Unbelievable.

“I don’t even know what to say about this,” Beck said. “I get so uptight about this stuff. This is the stuff that enrages me.”

Beck saluted Vines for making the decision to home-school her daughter, but asked how much longer parents will even have the option to home-school. Beck said this was approaching “Hitler Youth stuff.”

Islamic indoctrination. Spying on their parents’ medicine cabinets. And now excluding parents entirely from the teaching process? This is your nation’s educational system on Common Core.

http://toprightnews.com/texas-mom-says-shell-home-school-her-child-after-the-truly-frightening-thing-a-teacher-told-her/

It Has Come to This - By E.M. Cadwaladr (Full text - read and absorb what we have become!)

The United States of America that we grew up in, and in some cases fought for, no longer exists. I would like to write something stirring in defense of our Constitution, but it isn’t under attack. It is simply ignored. Some have proposed that we have a Constitutional convention to add new amendments. What would that accomplish? Would our present Federal government respect a set of new amendments when they don’t respect the old ones? What good does it do to insist on one’s rights as a citizen, when in fact mere citizenship has lost its meaning? Americans have no rights officials in Washington feel bound to recognize. Both Republicans and Democrats overrule majority opinion as a matter of course. They do not doubt for a moment that they are the best and brightest, and that our voting franchise is merely an antiquated inconvenience. My elected representatives represent no one but themselves. They make war on my culture, my faith, and my security-- then they insult me in front of the elitist media on TV. The executive branch, the congress, and most of the judiciary have no more respect for me as a human being than colonial empires had for the most backward and primitive of their subjects. The elites that live inside the beltway and in the bubble of academia should try living in Ohio or Missouri for a few years. “White privilege” isn’t doing all that well in rural West Virginia. We are here, now, in this country at this time. We are real people with real lives. We are not statistics in a sociologist’s model, nor are we third and fourth generation perpetrators from some politically reconstituted version of history. It is all too obvious that our most unrepresentative of representative governments neither knows us nor respects us. They despise us. It is too much to ask us not to despise them in return.

I am tired of being told by Barack Obama on the one hand, and Bill O’Reilly on the other, what my American values are or ought to be. I can work those out for myself. I am tired of living in the dumping ground for whatever group of hostile immigrants the social engineers in Washington import to ease their guilty consciences. Let them move their Mexican underclass and angry Syrian colonists to Martha’s Vineyard or Marin County north of San Francisco.Maybe this would help our legislators and “opinion makers” alleviate a bit of their never-ending narcissistic angst.  I am tired of nameless, self-righteous bureaucrats levering open the restrooms of my local schools to the confused transvestites that a liberal education churns out, then lecturing me about tolerance and individual rights. Where is their tolerance of my culture? Where is their respect for my rights? Where is the brotherly concern shown to my neighbors? I am tired of living in an ill-planned social experiment. Of taboo words and taboo ideas. I am tired of being called a racist by people who are, themselves, the worst of racists -- and who have denuded the word itself of any meaning.

To be quite honest, I have no particular love for Donald Trump -- but he is what we have. He doesn’t speak well. I don’t think he has any idea what a republic is. Then again, his last two predecessors didn’t really understand the concept of a republic either. No doubt it’s not a word they use at Harvard. Although I may not especially like the erratic, often juvenile Mr. Trump, it isn’t lost on me that he at least doesn’t hold me in contempt. He may make war on illegal immigration and Muslim fundamentalism, but most of the alternatives are making war on me. Twenty years ago I would have worried about a man who scares resident aliens, and even a few citizens, to death. You will forgive me if I have come to the epiphany that protecting absolutely every minority’s feelings is not a rational government’s primary purpose. You will forgive me, too, if I stop ignoring fourteen centuries of Islamic history, the stark brutality of Islamic scripture, and the barbarism of contemporary Islamic states. Give me a gated, crime-free community to live in, and maybe I can have the luxury of worrying about the planet’s weather.

I would prefer to have a genuine conservative candidate to vote for, and will probably vote for Cruz if he looks viable enough. But if Donald Trump is what it has come to -- I will happily take the risk and check the box next to his name. Republican, independent, or Bull Moose party -- I could not care less. Conservatives don’t have a party. We cannot be choosy. Better Trump than the Democrats' mad rush to national Hara-Kiri. And better Trump than the Republican establishment’s facilitation of the same national Hara-Kiri, plus the now intolerable old lie that “it’s the best that we could do.” It has never been impossible to build 700 miles of security fence. Eisenhower built most of the interstate highway system in under a decade. It has never been impossible to balance the budget. Over the course of American history balanced budgets have actually been the norm. Moral cowardice has never been an attractive trait, and no amount of clever advertising really makes it so. Ivy league “experts” who fail, then get congratulated for their failures by the Ivy League talking heads, do not impress me more than Trump. For all of his ratings appeal and flamboyance, he did at least accomplish something in his lifetime other than being popular and being famous. That’s better than “I made a great speech at the ‘04 convention,” or “I married Bill Clinton,” or, the perennial favorite, “I waited my turn.”

We have nearly died of the disease of too much compromise. Of “reaching across the aisle.” Of “building a coalition of our Muslim allies.” We have no real friends in either quarter. How can a free people compromise with totalitarian ideologies, either socialist or Islamic? Let’s not fool ourselves. America has bitter enemies -- both foreign and domestic. Donald Trump, for all of his flaws, must do. He speaks his mind. He understands and acknowledges at least the plainly obvious. Most of all, so far, he doesn’t scare.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/it_has_come_to_this.html#ixzz3vpK945TO
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

When the Takers Make More than the Makers - By Gene Van Son

When I was a lad way back in the 60s my father gave me some career planning advice -- “If you want to make money go to work in the private sector, but if you want job security go to work in the public sector. The public sector doesn’t pay as well as the private sector but the benefits are good and you’ll never have to worry about getting laid off.” 

My father’s advice made sense. Government employees are ‘public servants’ and servants are not supposed to make more than their employers. But that was then and this is now. The times have changed.   

With 2.7 million-plus workers (excluding non-civilian military) the federal government is the largest employer in the U.S. But now it seems that federal employees are also the best paid workers in the U.S. And when benefits are added in, the total compensation for federal employees dwarfs private sector pay --

Federal workers’ pay and benefits were 78 percent higher than private employees, who earned an average of $52,688 less than public sector workers last year.

The study found that federal government workers earned an average of $84,153 in 2014, compared to the private sector’s average of $56,350. Cato based its findings on figures from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).

But when adding in benefits pay for federal workers, the difference becomes more dramatic. Federal employees made $119,934 in total compensation last year, while private sector workers earned $67,246, a difference of over $52,000, or 78 percent.

But it turns out that it’s not just federal government workers who are happily succoring at the teats of the private sector. State and local government workers are also sucking Joe and Josephine Taxpayer dry…………..

We need to make one thing perfectly clear to the next president as well as to every member of Congress: we are sick and tired of politics as usual. 

The Federal Government bureaucracy needs to be downsized big time, the debt needs to be paid down even while defense spending is increased and our military capabilities are restored to pre-2008 levels. Our tax system also needs to be completely overhauled, Obamacare needs to be repealed, and Ron and Rand Paul may also be right – perhaps it’s time to take a long hard look at the Federal Reserve System.

There’s much more that needs to be done to fix all the problems our country is grappling with today.  If the GOP presidential candidate does win the next election and the GOP retains its majorities in the House and Senate, the Dems are going to fight tooth and nail for their secular fantasy utopian vision of what our county should be. We are not going to be able to reclaim our county in just 4 or 8 years. It is going to be a long uphill battle.  

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/when_the_takers_make_more_than_the_makers.html#ixzz3vpGeG28L
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Honey, I Shrunk the Middle Class: Perhaps 1/3 of Households Qualify - by Charles Hugh Smit

Middle class is more than income--it's a value system that recognizes the necessity of sacrifice, frugality, capital and long-term planning. If high-income households squander all the income on eating out, lavish vacations, matching luxury-brand autos, etc., they aren't middle class: their values do not support investing in their children's future, their own retirement (so they won't be a burden to their adult kids) and on building wealth that won't vanish when the current asset bubble bursts.

By my calculation (admittedly coarse, given the huge range of living expenses from lower-cost regions to sky-high locales on the Left and Right Coasts), around $100,000 for state/corporate employed adults (i.e. jobs that provide healthcare and retirement/401K benefits) and $130,000+ for self-employed people (who have to pay their own healthcare and retirement costs) is more or less the minimum required to fund the qualities described above.

It's remarkably easy to earn this income and have very little to show for it by year-end, so this is (at least in many areas) bare-bones.

As you can in this chart of nominal (not adjusted for inflation) median household income, this is roughly double median household income of $52,000 annually.

The Pew report places households with incomes from from $42,000 to $126,000 as middle class. Judging by my estimates, it would very difficult to meet these qualitative standards on $52,000 household income unless housing was nearly free (for example, the family house was owned free and clear and property taxes were low).

In many Left and Right Coast cities, $52,000 is essentially poverty level. Even in lower-cost areas, it would take at least 50% above median household income to fund a middle class life.

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve's policy of inflating bubbles in assets that were once stable places to build lasting equity (for example, housing) has devastated middle class wealth. Adjusted for inflation (which is likely under-stated, since big-ticket items such as college tuition and healthcare are under-represented in official inflation), household wealth has gone nowhere for over 20 years.

Full text at: http://www.oftwominds.com/blogdec15/shrunken-middle-class12-15.html

Obamanomics explained in one chart - By Thomas Lifson

You may be running into friends and realtives at holiday gatherings who claim that the 5% unemployment rate is one of Obama's success stories, and a good reason to stick with the Democrats.  Writing in Conservative HQ, George Rasley highlights a chart produced by Benjamin Weingarten in Genfkd that sums up the uselessness of the U3 unemployment  rate statistic inevitably tossed out by the media to make the claim that the economy is recovering under Obama. Most AT readers are sophisticated and realize that the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ s U3 “unemployment rate” does not count discouraged workers who have given up the search for work. The BLS calls these people “marginally attached workers,” and the criteria for blasting them into invisibility in the U3 stats are pretty easy to meet:

Persons not in the labor force who want and are available for work, and who have looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months (or since the end of their last job if they held one within the past 12 months), but were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.

But most of our friends and neighbors do not realize that the more realistic U6 rate, generally ignored by the media does count the “marginally attached workers” as unemployed, and it is nearly double the U3 rate (currently 9.9% versus 5%).

So how do we sum up all this complicated information in one chart?

Here it is. Show it to your friends who think Obama has been good for the economy:

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/12/obamanomics_explained_in_one_chart.html#ixzz3vp2jePO0
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

The Herd is Heading For a Cliff - By Jim Quinn

After experiencing two Federal Reserve induced booms and busts in the last fifteen years, you would think people would learn. But the true lesson of history is that people never learn from the lesson of history.

How did the S&P 500 trace out a total return of zero between 2000 and the end of 2011? By first losing half its value, then more than doubling, then losing more than half its value, and then doubling again. Across history, extreme valuations have invariably been followed by similar behavior – wide cyclical swings, yet only modest overall returns over the following decade.

Anyone fully invested in the stock market at this point in time is delusional and mad. If they think they can sense danger before the rest of the herd and exit once the stampede starts, they are badly mistaken. Just as they were in 2000 and 2007. Now is the time to regain your senses and stop playing in this rigged Wall Street game.

After years of Fed-induced yield-seeking speculation that has driven equity valuations to the second most extreme point of overvaluation in history (and the single most extreme point on the basis of median valuations), investors have somehow convinced themselves that this time will be different; that this time the market will maintain at a permanently high plateau. That belief is nothing new – it’s the same delusion that investors have held at speculative peaks across history, refusing to accept the familiar signs of danger until the equally familiar losses were conclusively in hand.

“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”  – Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

Full text at:   https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/jim-quinn/herd-headed-cliff/

There Is No Climate Change Disaster Except The One Governments Created - by Dr. Tim Ball

At the Paris Climate Conference of the Parties (COP21) we witnessed the biggest display of failed leadership in history from 195 countries. They established incorrect and misdirected policy based on failed and falsified science. It is a classic circular argument on a global scale. They invented the false problem of anthropogenic global warming/climate change and now they want to resolve the problem, but with a more disastrous solution.

Most countries were puppets that aspired to lead the deception but lacked the power so they contributed by serving as lackeys. Either way, all were purchased with promises of money. The majority receives money from successful countries, but all of them have an excuse for another tax……………

The CIA used the word climatocracy to describe the role of climate in political action. (Amusingly and perceptively, the spell checker tried to replace climatocracy with cleptocracy). Climatocracy is more applicable today. Political involvement in climate research is global and profound. Demand for action is very strong. Frighteningly, the demand is for action to deal with only one possibility based on the false assumption that today’s forecasts for the next 50 and 100 years are more accurate and certain than the belief in 1970 that cooling was inevitable. That forecast was wrong, as was every forecast the IPCC made since anthropogenic global warming became the scare in the late 1980s.

The sensible policy when you lack understanding is to do nothing. The proper course of action is for governments to face the truth and admit the science is wrong. Unfortunately, the lack of leadership they’ve already demonstrated guarantees that will not happen. They are obliged to do something in response to the hysteria they created.

There is a policy that can salvage something out of this self-inflicted chaos. It is a classicgame theory challenge based on the knowledge that cooling is a much greater threat than warming, especially for middle and high latitude countries. It is important for those nations listed as “well prepared” in Figure 1 because they prepare for warming when the probability of cooling is much higher and more threatening. All nations, but especially them, must ready for cooling. If you prepare for cooling, and it warms the adaptations are much easier. If you prepare for warming and cooling occurs the adaptations are difficult and in some instances impossible. But don’t expect any such logical, rational, leadership from the Paris world leaders, they only like games they create and control to improve their image of saving the planet and humanity.

Politics is the diversion of trivial men who, when they succeed at it, become more important in the eyes of more trivial men.

George Jean Nathan

Full text at: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/27/there-is-no-climate-change-disaster-except-the-one-governments-created/

PC Is About Control, Not Etiquette - By Jeff Deist

To begin, we need to understand that political correctness is not about being nice. It’s not simply a social issue, or a subset of the culture wars.

It’s not about politeness, or inclusiveness, or good manners. It’s not about being respectful toward your fellow humans, and it’s not about being sensitive or caring or avoiding hurt feelings and unpleasant slurs.

But you’ve heard this argument, I’m sure. PC is about simple respect and inclusiveness, they tell us. As though we need progressives, the cultural enforcers, to help us understand that we shouldn’t call someone retarded, or use the “N” word, make hurtful comments about someone’s appearance, or tolerate bullies.

If PC truly was about kindness and respect, it wouldn’t need to be imposed on us. After all, we already have a mechanism for the social cohesion PC is said to represent: it’s called manners. And we already have specific individuals charged with insuring that good manners are instilled and upheld: they’re called parents……..

But what exactly is PC? Let me take a stab at defining it: Political correctness is the conscious, designed manipulation of language intended to change the way people speak, write, think, feel, and act, in furtherance of an agenda.

PC is best understood as propaganda, which is how I suggest we approach it. But unlike propaganda, which historically has been used by governments to win favor for a particular campaign or effort, PC is all-encompassing. It seeks nothing less than to mold us into modern versions of Marx’s un-alienated society man, freed of all his bourgeois pretensions and humdrum social conventions.

Like all propaganda, PC fundamentally is a lie. It is about refusing to deal with the underlying nature of reality, in fact attempting to alter that reality by legislative and social fiat. A is no longer A.

To quote Hans-Hermann Hoppe:

[T]he masters … stipulate that aggression, invasion, murder and war are actually self-defense, whereas self-defense is aggression, invasion, murder and war. Freedom is coercion, and coercion is freedom. … Taxes are voluntary payments, and voluntarily paid prices are exploitative taxes. In a PC world, metaphysics is diverted and rerouted. Truth becomes malleable, to serve a bigger purpose determined by our superiors….

Read the rest at:  https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/jeff-deist/pc-commie/

Stand Strong When Your Kids Go Off The Rails - By Georgi Boorman

Stop Kicking Or You’ll Miss the Good Stuff

I should have trusted the promise of parenthood when my mother and father needed it. Yet because I did not trust in crucial moments, but have lived to see the rightness of their judgment, I cherish that promise all the more. I cling to it desperately, and I pray the persistent love and persevering wisdom of my parents continue for my younger siblings and are passed on to the next generation through their children and my own.

The truth is, you never stop needing your parents.

Some time after I had married the man I was truly meant to be with, I was putting away dishes in my parents’ kitchen on a visit. In a conversation about relationships, my mother told one of my sisters emphatically, about me, “She almost missed this!”

She meant the peace and contentment in my life, seeds planted before I had begun that courtship that had grown and blossomed in our marriage. It was a precious state of being that had been completely lacking in my previous rebellion. I often think back on this, that I almost missed it, and I would have, if it weren’t for my parents’ intervening wisdom.

The truth is, you never stop needing your parents. Parenting doesn’t stop when a child turns 16, or 18, or 21. It doesn’t stop when kids graduate high school, get a first job, or decide they know better. Although eventually all your decisions are yours as you come into adulthood, the guidance of a mother and father, from both the lessons from your childhood and their advice in the present, is invaluable. Ironically, the less direct influence my parents have had on me, the more I realize how much I have needed their patience, discipline, and love.

Whether you are still under your parents’ roof or have long since left their nest and begun your own, cherish the promise of parenthood. Think on how it has influenced your character and choices. They have been, and will always be, your mother and father.

Full Text at: Stand Strong When Your Kids Go Off The Rails

The Polemics of Donald Trump - by Greg Richards (Truth is not kind. It just is.)

What Donald Trump is saying is both:

1. true and/or a real-world response to extreme conditions and at the same time is;
2. scandalous.

How can this be? What is missing here?

Liberal pieties.

What Trump is traducing is not the truth, but liberal pieties. But that means that liberal pieties, the “truths” of liberalism, are not literally true! They are untruths.

Why is this? Because liberalism is not built on the world the way that it is, but the way liberals think it should be. This is why all their programs fail, and all their “facts” are wrong, and this is why liberals go around looking as if they have just bitten down on a lemon. They are constantly being insulted by, being surprised by, being taken aback by…reality. They build papier-mâché worlds, but the truth keeps crashing through their walls.

In order to maintain their inflated self-regard, something other than themselves must be to blame. Who? The truth-tellers……

Since liberals control the vocabulary and the terms of debate in the public space, it takes both courage and skill to tell the truth in it. Donald Trump is the first one to do this since Reagan (and he is stronger than Reagan in this regard because we are much further gone as a society now than we were in 1980).

For the last 50 years, liberals have been the challengers. Now they are in charge. And we see how civilization collapses when that happens -- in national defense, in immigration, in the cities, in the universities, in public education. This is the first election in which liberals are not challenging, they are defending. They have made the long march through the institutions and now that they are in charge, are leaving in ruins the country first of all, but also themselves.

Trump is calling them on it and they don’t like it. More to the point, they don’t understand it. Donald Trump is challenging the liberal world. He is pointing out its failures. Trump is in the position of Harry Truman: he isn’t giving the liberals hell, he is telling the truth and they think it’s hell………

Liberalism can liquidate a society; it cannot build one. We are now at the end of liberalism in America. Liberals have the commanding heights of most of our major institutions and they are consequently in the early stages of collapse.

Donald Trump is running instinctively against the failures, the disasters of liberalism issue by issue as they arise. That is the drama of this election.

Thrilling times.

Read full text at: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/the_polemics_of_donald_trump.html#ixzz3vdym4E1o
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals - Or 'How to Debate a Lefty - Don't!' It's not a debate - it's more of a peei.. contest!:)

(Occasionally I have 'debated' a lefty on line - but it's never a real debate. I quickly learned that almost immediately they revert to one or two tactics - ignore any assertion I make and discredit the source or document I cite. See how easy it is to be a lefty debater - any dummy can do that!

The only other tactic they might use is to say "Yeah, but the Christians are just as bad!" or some other opinion based on their opinion - again, it's very simple to be a lefty debater.

Then they throw in the usual pejorative phrases like 'right wing nut job', 'knuckle dragging neanderthal', etc. etc. - and don't forget to use the names of Koch brothers, Bush and Fox News as our support system. That's about it - and of course  - attack, attack, attack!!!!! Again - simple!

Now notice the outline of Alinsky's Rules - right out of the playbook, eh!

So for all you debaters - here is the left's playbook - learn it and know what's going on. Don't tell me I didn't warn you.:)

Full disclosure: I actually enjoy some of this, especially when I can tweak them with their own plays - it's fun! Here is also a related article by Gavin McInnes - http://crushlimbraw.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-death-of-discussion.html - be sure to read it in full text where it is linked to Taki's website - Enjoy! - CL)

Saul Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals

Here is the complete list from Alinsky. (Borrowed from Best of Beck)

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)
* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)
* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)
* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)
* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)
* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)
* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

7 Examples Of Demonizing Dissension & Public Opinion-by Paul A Philips

As the Western world powers that be tighten their tyrannical controlling noose on humanity dissention and public opinion has never been so important: -As consistent with the quote from Orwell‘s novel 1984

“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

To countermeasure this much-needed dissention and public opinion to raise awareness and free humanity the powers that be have taken a severe stance on punishing those who oppose their views regardless of truth or untruth to advance an oppressive agenda.

So, in response, during these times of universal deceit and oppression, here are 7 examples of unjustly demonising dissention and public opinion.

1. Medical dissention and the AMA’s gagging orders

To get an even larger slice of the medical monopoly the highly influential AMA (American Medical Association) a wing of the medical/pharmaceutical establishment has announced plans to put in gag orders designed to control and prevent doctors from speaking out publically on ‘dubious alternative medical practices.’  Should doctors go outside of the AMA’s guidelines then they could face having their licenses revoked while being unjustly accused of quackery...

-This unfairly biased stance will even further hit integral doctors offering help and advice on track-record proven effective alternative medical practices.

What has the US come to? People, are you going to allow this suppression of free speech? History has shown us time after time that medical advancements resulting in humanitarian contribution has come from challenging medical orthodoxy.  

2. Climate change

At a recent talk in Austin, Texas for the yearly South by Southwest Festival (SXSW) Al Gore, former vice-president, made a number of pseudo-scientific statements provably wrong about climate change with all its data manipulation in support of this monumental hoax.   

Gore described climate change as ‘settled science’ but nothing could be further from the truth. Climate change is far from settled...

No doubt the audience was filled with supporters of the church of climatology who I doubt would be able to answer these questions challenging  climate change.

The powers that be want you to believe in climate change because it’s part of their hidden agenda for power, profit and political gain. Their modus operandi is to punish those who disagree, regardless of the facts contradicting climate change.

As more and more people realise they’ve been had when it comes to climate change the powers that be resort to extreme countermeasures: In the talk Gore told his audience to ramp up their angst against climate change "deniers," Some, in support of this extremist left-wing agenda have made films which includes calling global warming critics as as loathsome and villainous.

-The idea that someone should be punished for differences of opinion is the ultimate tyrannical approach. But what do you expect from a bunch of hysterical authoritarians pushing an agenda based on false pretexts who fear having their lies exposed?  

Read the rest at: 7 Examples of Demonising Dissention and Public Opinion

When Christian Soldiers Refused To Fight - by John V. Denson on the most heartening event of WWI.

The Christmas Truce, which occurred primarily between the British and German soldiers along the Western Front in December 1914, is an event the official histories of the “Great War” leave out, and the Orwellian historians hide from the public. Stanley Weintraub has broken through this barrier of silence and written a moving account of this significant event by compiling letters sent home from the front, as well as diaries of the soldiers involved. His book is entitled Silent Night: The Story of the World War I Christmas Truce. The book contains many pictures of the actual events showing the opposing forces mixing and celebrating together that first Christmas of the war. This remarkable story begins to unfold, according to Weintraub, on the morning of December 19, 1914:

Lieutenant Geoffrey Heinekey, new to the 2nd Queen’s Westminister Rifles, wrote to his mother, “A most extraordinary thing happened. … Some Germans came out and held up their hands and began to take in some of their wounded and so we ourselves immediately got out of our trenches and began bringing in our wounded also. The Germans then beckoned to us and a lot of us went over and talked to them and they helped us to bury our dead. This lasted the whole morning and I talked to several of them and I must say they seemed extraordinarily fine men. … It seemed too ironical for words. There, the night before we had been having a terrific battle and the morning after, there we were smoking their cigarettes and they smoking ours.”………….

As night fell on Christmas Eve the British soldiers noticed the Germans putting up small Christmas trees along with candles at the top of their trenches and many began to shout in English “We no shoot if you no shoot.” The firing stopped along the many miles of the trenches and the British began to notice that the Germans were coming out of the trenches toward the British who responded by coming out to meet them. They mixed and mingled in No Man’s Land and soon began to exchange chocolates for cigars and various newspaper accounts of the war which contained the propaganda from their respective homelands. Many of the officers on each side attempted to prevent the event from occurring but the soldiers ignored the risk of a court-martial or of being shot.

Some of the meetings reported in diaries were between Anglo-Saxons and German Saxons and the Germans joked that they should join together and fight the Prussians. The massive amount of fraternization, or maybe just the Christmas spirit, deterred the officers from taking action and many of them began to go out into No Man’s Land and exchange Christmas greetings with their opposing officers. Each side helped bury their dead and remove the wounded so that by Christmas morning there was a large open area about as wide as the size of two football fields separating the opposing trenches. The soldiers emerged again on Christmas morning and began singing Christmas carols, especially “Silent Night.” They recited the 23rd Psalm together and played soccer and football. Again, Christmas gifts were exchanged and meals were prepared openly and attended by the opposing forces. Weintraub quotes one soldier’s observation of the event: “Never … was I so keenly aware of the insanity of war.”……………

The last chapter of Weintraub’s book is entitled “What If— ?” This is counterfactual history at its best and he sets out what he believes the rest of the twentieth century would have been like if the soldiers had been able to cause the Christmas Truce of 1914 to stop the war at that point. Like many other historians, he believes that with an early end of the war in December of 1914, there probably would have been no Russian Revolution, no Communism, no Lenin, and no Stalin. Furthermore, there would have been no vicious peace imposed on Germany by the Versailles Treaty, and therefore, no Hitler, no Nazism, and no World War II. With the early truce there would have been no entry of America into the European War and America might have had a chance to remain, or return, to being a Republic rather than moving toward World War II, the “Cold” War (Korea and Vietnam), and our present status as the world bully.

Weintraub states that:

Franklin D. Roosevelt, only an obscure assistant secretary of the navy — of a fleet going nowhere militarily — would have returned to a boring law practice, and never have been the losing but attractive vice presidential candidate in 1920, a role earned by his war visibility. Wilson, who would not be campaigning for reelection in 1916 on a platform that he kept America out of war, would have lost (he only won narrowly) to a powerful new Republican president, Charles Evans Hughes.

He also suggests another result of the early peace:

Germany in peace rather than war would have become the dominant nation in Europe, possibly in the world, competitor to a more slowly awakening America, and to an increasingly ambitious and militant Japan. No Wilsonian League of Nations would have emerged. … Yet, a relatively benign, German-led, Commonwealth of Europe might have developed decades earlier than the European Community under leaders not destroyed in the war or its aftermath……….

The Great War killed over ten million soldiers and Weintraub states, “Following the final Armistice came an imposed peace in 1919 that created new instabilities ensuring another war.” This next war killed more than fifty million people, over half of whom were civilians. Weintruab writes:

To many, the end of the war and the failure of the peace would validate the Christmas ceasefire as the only meaningful episode in the apocalypse. It belied the bellicose slogans and suggested that the men fighting and often dying were, as usual, proxies for governments and issues that had little to do with their everyday lives. A candle lit in the darkness of Flanders, the truce flickered briefly and survives only in memoirs, letters, song, drama and story.

Weintraub concludes his remarkable book with the following:

A celebration of the human spirit, the Christmas Truce remains a moving manifestation of the absurdities of war. A very minor Scottish poet of Great War vintage, Frederick Niven, may have got it right in his “A Carol from Flanders,” which closed,

O ye who read this truthful rime From Flanders, kneel and say: God speed the time when every day Shall be as Christmas Day.

Read more at:  When Christian Soldiers Refused To Fight - LewRockwell

Saved by Christmas - By Steve McCann

 (I wish you all a Merry Christmas by posting this article as my gift from your humble dispatcher! - CL)

In the United States and the nations of Europe preparations are underway to celebrate Christmas as first and foremost a tribute to materialism.  These increasingly agnostic and secular societies are not only willfully choosing to ignore the existence of God but they are rejecting the moral and behavioral guidelines established by Judeo-Christian teachings.  They are, as a substitute, placing more and more trust in mankind.  The ultimate consequence for a society that chooses this misguided reliance and the reality of God’s outstretched helping hand is embodied in the story of a young boy from the streets of a nameless city in an unknown country.

World War II has ended and somewhere in central Europe, a small, frail, solitary figure, his clothes in tatters, gingerly walks around the piles of rubble and broken glass on the streets of a once-bustling city now lying in ruins.  The few still-upright walls, their windows and doors blown out, appear as skeletons framed against the blue sky.  No one knows this boy’s age, his name or to whom he was born.  After the death of a woman he had lived with--perhaps a relation, but perhaps not--he was on his own.

Along with other abandoned children, his daytime hours were spent in the never-ending pursuit of surviving for another day.  The search for food was their constant companion.  Oftentimes they begged from the locals or foreign soldiers stationed nearby, or, as a last resort, they rummaged through the garbage cans outside of military mess halls.

At night, the least destroyed of the nearby buildings with a remnant of a roof overhead served as a shelter from the elements.  But no one could escape from the constant stench of death and destruction in the air.

As the sun rose on a day which promised to be like so many before it, the boy was making his usual morning rounds when he heard a woman’s desperate screams.  Running to the scene, he saw a teenaged girl pinned against a wall as a soldier was tearing at her clothing.  Instinctively, he picked up some ever-present broken bricks and began throwing them at the assailant.  After a few bricks found their mark, the man released the girl, allowing her to escape.  He then turned, pistol in hand, to confront his tormentor.  Scrambling to run away, the boy heard a loud noise and felt the bullet entering his back as if hit by someone swinging a baseball bat followed immediately by an excruciating burning sensation as he fell to the ground.  After falling forward from the impact of the bullet, he got up and ran some distance before passing out.

When the boy awoke, he was in a military hospital, being treated for a gunshot wound and malnutrition.  For the first time he could remember, he slept in a bed and was fed three meals a day.  After recuperating, he was placed on a train and taken on a long journey to an orphanage near Bremen, Germany………….

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/saved_by_christmas.html#ixzz3vLeGtkAN
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

No king but Jesus. John C. Wright reminds Christians who they serve and celebrate this Christmas Eve:

No submission

No king but Jesus. John C. Wright reminds Christians who they serve and celebrate this Christmas Eve:

The time for submission is past.

Christians have been slandered, libeled, demeaned, and buffaloed by a very small and very patient group of Leftwing zealots who have somehow convinced the world that there is no place for us in the this world: no place for our nativity scenes at Christmas, no place for Christian marriage, no place for the Ten Commandment in our courthouse decorations, no place for historical accuracy, reality or truth in our lives, and no prayers in our schools.

Enough is enough. We outnumber them. It is time to drive them from our midst, and return our civilization to being civilized.

Let us be Christendom again.

A Merry Christmas Eve to you all. The night is dark and we find ourselves in a time of war. And yet, we remain joyful and thankful.

I love Christmas Eve, the midnight masses, the candlelight services, the cheerful Christmas greetings, and the certain knowledge that all around the world, the vast network of believers reaches into every darkness and shadow.

But whether the season's greeting is said openly with a smile or whispered surreptitiously under threat of death and torture, the Christmas message of hope in a fallen world remains the same.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/12/no-submission.html

http://www.scifiwright.com/2015/12/defy-the-devil-celebrate-christmas/

The graveyard of empires strikes again

How, exactly, is this failure to win in Afghanistan even remotely surprising, considering the past failures of the British and Soviet empires there?

Taliban outlast 14 years of U.S. combat in Afghanistan

The sudden killings of six American service members on a foot patrol by a suicide bomber this week is a graphic message back home that the Taliban are durable, able to launch a number of coordinated attacks in recent months across Afghanistan 14 years after the U.S. invasion.

A Pentagon report calls the security situation “fragile” and writes of the Taliban’s “resilience throughout the second half of the year.”

Perhaps they are unaware of our superior technology? Or perhaps we simply aren't trying hard enough. Here is the thing. If you can't win in nearly four times the amount of time it took to force both Japan and Nazi Germany to surrender, you can't win, period.

So stop already. Declare victory if you must, even if no one will believe it. But stop!

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-graveyard-of-empires-strikes-again.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/23/taliban-outlast-14-years-of-us-combat-in-afghanist/