Sunday, September 27, 2015

Is Obama A Muslim? Is He A Christian? You decide.

  A man, who strangely enough, can't be identified, asked Trump the following question at a New Hampshire town hall meeting this past Thursday. "We have a problem in this country. It's called Muslims. We know our current president is one. He's not even an American." Trump then said: "We need this question. This is the first question." The man then said "We have training camps growing where they want to kill us. That's my question. When can we get rid of them?" Later NBC's Chuck Todd asked Ben Carson if he could support a Muslim for president. Carson replied. "I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that,”

  It would not surprise me if the questioner at the Trump rally was a plant. However I do know people that sound like this guy. Allow me to dissect what this man said. We have a problem in this country. It's called Muslims. The man brings up a subject that really does need to be addressed. The statement should have been this. We have a problem in this country. It's called radical Islam. If the man was a real Trump supporter he was displaying his bigotry against Muslims as a whole. There are Muslims that I trust and like. Besides the ones I knew in Turkey I have come to know many here in the United States. One of them was a fellow security officer that I had great respect for. He was an interpreter for American troops in Iraq and was in this country because Al Qaeda had put a price on his head. This man was one of the smartest, nicest and most vigilant officers that I ever worked with. As his supervisor I handled an incident when a low life verbally assaulted him with threats and racial slurs. It was an awkward situation because the perpetrator was the son of a long time mall employee. Three reliable witnesses verified that my officer did nothing to provoke the attack. Regardless, we escorted the man off the property. In retrospect I regret that I didn't have the man arrested because I have always felt that I didn't do enough to redeem the situation for the sake of this officer. He deserved more than that.

  Having said that there are a huge number of Muslims out there that can't be trusted and they are here to kill us and they exploit our freedoms with the goal of eventually establishing a worldwide caliphate. They intend to do this by stealth, propaganda, and population growth within our country. The average American's birthrates cannot keep up with Muslim birthrates. Europe is much farther along. In the Netherlands the most popular name for a baby is Mohammad. They are having many more children. Under Sharia law a Muslim is allowed to have four wives. This is the insidious goal of the Muslim Brotherhood. Their long range plan is for the eventual domination of America as outlined in a 1991 meeting. “The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…” “[W]e must possess a mastery of the art of ‘coalitions’, the art of ‘absorption’ and the principles of ‘cooperation.’” Prominent radical front groups like the following are working to advance this agenda. Groups like CAIR, ISNA, ICNA and others. This approach could come straight out of Saul Alinsky's (Rules For Radicals).

  The man Trump supporters next statement was this "We know our current president is one. He's not even an American." As far as Obama being a Muslim I think that the man is out on a limb here. I don't know that we can prove that Obama is a Muslim. Nor can we prove that he's not a Muslim. Obama's biological father was a Muslim turned atheist. His stepfather was also a Muslim. There is a debate as to what kind of school Obama was attending in Indonesia as a child. Some say that it was a Muslim school, or Madrassa. His defenders claim that it was a public school. There is no doubt that Obama is well versed in the beliefs and rituals of the Islamic faith. His past speeches and interviews make that very clear. At the very least, in my opinion, Obama is a radical Muslim sympathizer. He supported the radical regime in Iran when they violently put down the Democratic movement there early in his presidency. His silence was deafening. During the so-called Arab Spring he supported the radicals. In Egypt it was the radical Muslim Mohammed Morsi. Obama opposed the more moderate Abdel Fattah el Sisi who overthrew Morsi with the support of the Egyptian people. He has been cool if not downright hostile toward el Sisi ever since. Obama refuses to identify Islamic terrorrists by their proper name. He still calls the Ft. Hood shooting workplace violence. Obama has taken half hearted measures against ISIS. What he has done has been mainly for show and is doing very little to stem their progress. Killing Bin Laden was a great accomplishment but it doesn't go nearly far enough. The political correctness of the Obama administration along with cutting our military is having devastating effects. Obama has failed to show support for Israel and has been openly hostile to them. He stood by and allowed a radical regime to take over in Yemen after declaring it to be safe. Although Muammar Gaddaffi was no angel he had become more of a moderate in Libya and had turned over his weapons of mass destruction to the U.S. A radical regime is now in control of Libya after his overthrow and death.

  Obama joined a church in Chicago called Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago that was pastored by the radical Jeremiah Wright. The basic doctrine of the church is Black Liberation theology which is based on a Marxist doctrine called Liberation theology that is very prominent in South America. The “Black Liberation theology” of scholars such as James Cone, who regard Jesus Christ as a “black messiah” and blacks as “the chosen people” who will only accept a god who assists their aim of destroying the “white enemy.” “If God is not for us and against white people,” writes Cone, “then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community.” … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love. Black Liberation theology is also Marxist, which advocates a redistribution of wealth. Adherents to this belief take on a perpetual state of victimhood at the hands of white society. Obama sat in a church that the pastor preached this garbage for twenty years but he claims that he never heard it. The tone of the so-called gospel preached at Trinity is more akin to the hatred of Louis Farrakhan than the gospel of a loving Christ.

Jeremiah Wright


So is Obama a Muslim or is he a Christian? If he believes in black liberation theology I wouldn't think that he is a real Christian. My understanding of the Bible teaches me that this theology is heresy. There is a component of Islam called taqiyyah. Muslims are allowed to lie in order to hide their faith if they feel the need. One Muslim writer wrote that "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.The taqiyyah is allowed until the Day of Ressurrection". Obama could be lying. Of course we all know that Obama would never lie. He might be Muslim for all we know but who can prove it one way or another? I don't put anything past this man.
  The questioner at the Trump rally then stated that Obama is not an American. I am pretty satisfied that he is but we must remember that Trump is the only person to ever successfully put Obama on the defensive. He pressured him into producing his birth certificate. I like the bumper sticker on my truck. (I can care less where Obama was born, it is where he is living now that bugs me.) I believe that Rudy Giuliani was right on when he said that Obama didn't love his country. In my opinion a strong case can be made for that but that is another article. Finally the Trump supporter ended with a statement and a question. There are training camps in America. When can we get rid of them? This is a very valid question. We believe that there are radical Muslim training camps all over America and we have at least one here in Dover Tennessee. It is unbelievable that especially after September 11th, 2001 we are even tolerating this.

  Chuck Todd's question to Ben Carson was this. Could he support a Muslim who was running for president? Carson replied this way. "I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that,” Before I address this subject I will be waiting for newsmen to ask Hillary equivalent questions. I imagine that I will be waiting for a long time for that. Carson's answer was not biased or bigoted in my opinion and he later clarified his statement by saying that he could not vote for a Muslim who believed in Sharia law. If we could vote for a Muslim that was a statesman such as Anwar Sadat I could see that happening. The Muslim Brotherhood was responsible for the assassination of Anwar Sadat by the way. Constitutionally we cannot prevent a Muslim from running for president. However any Muslim running for president would need to be thoroughly vetted and America doesn't do a good job of that. This is how we ended up with Obama. So I wholeheartedly agree with Carson. I would not advocate electing a Muslim for president. So, is Obama a Christian? Or is he a Muslim? My answer to the first question is no. To the second, who knows?



Friday, September 25, 2015

Honorable Manhood

  Major General Joshua Chamberlain of the 20th Maine Regiment received the formal surrender of Confederate forces at Appomattox Virginia. Chamberlain himself was wounded six times during the course of the war fighting against Confederate forces. He was so badly wounded at Petersburg that a newspaper wrote his obituary. Chamberlain was a very moral man and he hated slavery. Yet when he looked into the eyes of those proud, ragged, barefoot and gaunt men, he was looking into the eyes of honorable manhood.

  "Before us in proud humiliation stood the embodiment of manhood, men whom neither toil and suffering, nor the fact of death... could bend from their resolve; standing before us now, thin, worn and famished, but erect, with eyes looking level into ours, waking memories that bound us together as no other bond; was not such manhood to be welcomed back into a Union so tested and assured?" Speaking for myself, this is why I honor the Confederate flag.

Saturday, September 19, 2015

The Unraveling Of Lyndon Johnson

  My good buddy and colleague Kevin Barrett. (Notice that I threw in a little elitist lingo there) stated that Lyndon Johnson, after retiring from the presidency, let himself go physically. He grew his hair long and gained extra pounds before he suffered his fatal heart attack in 1973. His question to me was this. Do you think that Johnson was suffering from depression or was he identifying with the Vietnam protesters? I believe that he was suffering from depression. Johnson's greatest ambition from the earliest age was to be president. As a teenager he would tell others that he was going to be president someday. He had a plan that he followed to the letter and he never diverted from it. His plan was that he would first be elected to the House of Representatives. The second part of his plan was to be elected to the senate and becoming Senate Majority leader. From there he would run for president. He was offered a position in the Roosevelt Administration as the head of his rural electrification program and a chance to run for governor of Texas along with other positions over time but he turned them all down because they didn't fit in to his plan. His plan was fulfilled until he ran for president in 1960. He underestimated John Kennedy and lost the nomination to him. Of course Kennedy was elected partly because he chose Johnson as his Vice Presidential running mate. This choice united the Southern block of Democratic voters with the eastern block of Democratic voters. Kennedy needed Texas to win. The Kennedy's looked down on Johnson as a crude Southern hick. He realized this and resented it. The Vice presidency was hell on Johnson. He felt totally useless. Johnson was a man of action. He became president through the back door when Kennedy was assassinated. Johnson was then able to work his magic. No president in American history had the power and influence over congress like Johnson. All of his years of experience enabled him to pass the unfinished legislative agenda of Kennedy and then he went on to pass his own agenda. Johnson holds the record for passing more legislation than any president in American history. He did it legitimately and didn't use the methods of the coward Obama. The pen and a phone. However his pen and his phone were used to communicate with congress because unlike Obama he had respect for them. After his retirement from the presidency being out of politics for someone like Johnson had to be even worse than his time as Vice President. Especially at the end of such a controversial and failed presidency. For Johnson this was a death sentence. Hopefully I have answered Kevin's question but I want to talk about Johnson's successes and failures and evaluate his entire presidency.

  Like Ulysses S. Grant, Lyndon Johnson came very close to dying in obscurity. Had it not been for the Civil War Grant would have been just another common man lost to history. Had it not been for an assassins bullet Lyndon Johnson would have been just a footnote in American History. From the time he became Vice President in 1961 until November 22, 1963, he was steadily losing prestige and political power. Due to a combination of his own mistakes his image in the Kennedy Administration as a country hick, and Robert Kennedy's loathing for him, he had virtually no influence on political policy in Washington. He was a virtual nobody. It was becoming evident that Johnson had lost his political pull in Texas to John Connally. A good case could be made that had Kennedy lived he would have dropped Johnson from his ticket in 1964. Kennedy picked him in the first case to help win the Southern states in 1960, primarily Texas, Louisiana, and the Carolina's. Johnson campaigned hard and came through for Kennedy in a big way. Kennedy won the South. Things had changed since 1960 however. Kennedy's championing of Civil Rights had alienated the South and Johnson no longer had the political clout in the there that he had in 1960. Kennedy had lost support in the South but had gained it in those states in the North that he had lost in 1960. It was believed that he could win without the South. If Kennedy had lived it was very probable that he would have been reelected in 1964. Even if Kennedy had maintained LBJ as Vice President, Robert Kennedy would have been waiting in the wings to run in 1968. The obscurity of the VP position was taking an emotional and physical toll on a man that had devoted his life to becoming president. Johnson's lifelong plan had been to become a congressman, a senator and from that office he would be catapulted into the presidency. The first part of his plan had been successful but he had totally underestimated John Kennedy in 1960. If he had started his campaign earlier and been more focused he would have probably won the nomination. However by the time Johnson realized what was happening Kennedy had stole a march on him and robbed Johnson of key delegates necessary for the nomination. Johnson had survived a massive heart attack in 1955 and the Johnson men did not live to be very old. Time was Johnson's enemy and 1960 would prove to be his best chance for the White House and he had screwed that up. A head shot from Oswald's rifle would give Johnson the ultimate power that he always craved, and most of all, that bullet saved him from historical obscurity.

  I judge Johnson in three areas The 1964 and 65 Civil Rights Acts, the war on poverty, and the war in Vietnam. Johnson's success  in the area of Civil Rights was the most courageous stance that he ever took. For that alone he deserves a monument right next to the Lincoln Memorial. Unfortunately his war in Vietnam and war on poverty had disastrous consequences for this country. In Congress Johnson was the consummate politician. To succeed in congress from a Southern state and to be elected to office as a Southern congressman he had to take a segregationist stance. In 1956 he was unsuccessful in his attempt to be nominated for president but he wanted to win in 1960. No Southerner had been elected president since the Civil War. Northerners did not trust Southern politicians because of segregation and their treatment of black people. Johnson knew that he would have to pass a civil rights bill in order to win the presidency and broaden his appeal among Northerners and Black people. He was able to pass a very watered down civil rights bill in 1957. Johnson had to water it down because he knew if he didn't, Blacks would end up with nothing. To him something was better than nothing. The main thing that blacks gained from it was the right to vote. Johnson regularly used racial slurs but like Truman, who also used racial slurs, he truly wanted justice for black people. This is why, as president, he pushed through the 1964 and 65 Civil Rights Acts. Kennedy is given much credit for the 1964 Civil Rights Act because it was originally proposed by him. Kennedy however did not have the skill and ruthlessness to pass it if he had lived. Kennedy had a legislative domestic agenda before he was assassinated. It included many things including tax cuts and a Civil rights bill. Kennedy asked Johnson's advice on how he should proceed in Congress. Johnson advised him to push his domestic agenda through Congress first and save Civil Rights for last. If he pushed Civil Rights first, it would be filibustered by Southern congressmen and his domestic agenda would be held up. Nothing would be accomplished. Kennedy did not follow Johnson's advice and presented the Civil Rights bill first thereby delaying the bulk of his legislative agenda. Johnson rose to the pinnacle of power in the House of Representatives by wooing the powerful speaker of the House Sam Rayburn, who was also a Texan. He did the same thing in the Senate by befriending the powerful Democratic Majority leader Richard Russell from Georgia. No politician knew more about Congress and how to get things done than Lyndon Johnson. After passing the 1964 Civil Rights Act Johnson realized that he had lost the South to the Republican Party. Bill Moyers. a Johnson aide, stated "When he signed the act he was euphoric, but late that very night I found him in a melancholy mood as he lay in bed reading the bulldog edition of the Washington Post with headlines celebrating the day. I asked him what was troubling him. "I think we just delivered the South to the Republican party for a long time to come". The following is a passage from his first speech to Congress two days after the funeral of John Kennedy, Wednesday November 27th, 1963. 

First, no memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long. We have talked long enough in this country about equal rights. We have talked for one hundred years or more. It is time now to write the next chapter, and to write it in the books of law. I urge you again, as I did in 1957 and again in 1960, to enact a civil rights law so that we can move forward to eliminate from this Nation every trace of discrimination and oppression that is based upon race or color. There could be no greater source of strength to this Nation both at home and abroad.

  As far as the War on Poverty and the Vietnam War we are still paying a terrible price. The War on Poverty combined with the Hippie movement was a curse on this land. Regardless of whether you fall down on the side that it actually alleviated poverty in America or it didn't, in my opinion the greatest damage was to the American family. Before the War on Poverty there were two safety nets that discouraged out of wedlock births. A man was an important part of a family and being pregnant out of wedlock, especially without a man, was a shameful thing. It was also a sure path to poverty. Economics professor Walter E. Williams writes: "According to the 1938 Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, that year 11 percent of black children and 3 percent of white children were born to unwed mothers." In mid 1960's America, the nation's out-of-wedlock birth rate (which stood at 7.7 percent at the time) began a rapid and relentless climb across all demographic lines, a climb that would continue unabated until 1994, when the Welfare Reform Act helped put the brakes on that trend. Today the overall American illegitimacy rate is about 40.7 percent (29.1 percent for non-Hispanic whites). For blacks, it is about 72 percent—approximately three times the level of black illegitimacy that existed when the War on Poverty began in 1964. Before the expansion of Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) only widows and poor single women received help from the government. This law was New Deal legislation passed in 1935. Originally mostly white women received it because they usually didn't work before being widowed. Most black women were working and didn't qualify. After the law was expanded to include more women in the 1960's it still primarily affected white women. The AFDC program tended to treat households with a cohabiting male who was not the natural father of the children much more leniently than those with a resident spouse or father of the children. This feature created a clear disincentive for marriage and also a clear incentive for divorce, because women who married faced the reduction or loss of their AFDC benefits. The welfare reform act of 1996 limited women to five years and ended much of the abuse of the program. Because of the sexual revolution and the Hippie movement out of wedlock births were no longer shameful. My cousin became pregnant out of wedlock at 15 in the early 1960's and my aunt kept her hid from the family until after the baby was born because she was so embarrassed. Now having children out of wedlock is nothing. The Hippie movement came about as a result of the Vietnam War. This movement popularized drug use which has also been very damaging to society and the family. Because of Johnson's failure and mishandling of the Vietnam War drug use among American troops skyrocketed. This has also aggravated social problems and drug addiction related to returning Vietnam veterans and has contributed to homelessness. The combination of single parent and fatherless homes combined with increased drug use has contributed to the increase in poverty and crime since the 1960's. This can all be placed at the feet of LBJ.

  I have often wondered how different America would be today if John Kennedy had lived or Barry Goldwater had been elected president in 1964. There is pretty solid evidence that Kennedy was moving toward a more moderate stance in regard to Vietnam. He felt that the Vietnamese were going to have shoulder the major part of the effort to defend Vietnam. We would continue to supply arms and training but the Vietnamese would have to provide the combat troops. This in essence was the same policy that Nixon would later use to get us out of the war. It was called Vietnamization. When Johnson became president upon the death of Kennedy he felt an obligation to keep the same cabinet and advisers that Kennedy had. These men were called the ""best and the brightest" by author David Halberstam in a book by the same title. People like Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy, John Kenneth Galbraith, George Ball, Nicholas Katzenbach, Walt Rostow, Maxwell Taylor, and William Bundy just to name a few. These were the whiz kids of academia and industry brought in to manage and advise Kennedy and later Johnson of military strategy regarding Vietnam. A measured response strategy that produced a successful outcome in the Cuban Missile Crisis was also used as we escalated the war beginning in March 1965. There were bombing halts, military bombing targets were picked by the White House. We avoided taking out enemy sanctuaries in Laos and Cambodia. Johnson would not invade North Vietnam or do anything to increase the likelihood of China intervening in the war as they did in Korea. Our strategy for winning the war defied common sense.

  The Eisenhower Administration had focused on building up our nuclear Triad forces, which was a three pronged method of defending America with nuclear armed bombers, ICBM's, (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles), and SLBM's, (Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles). This was called the New Look. Ike knew that it was cheaper to build up nuclear forces rather than conventional forces. As a result he had less options. He developed a military strategy called (Massive Retaliation). If countries got out of line he would just threaten them with nuclear destruction. After Kennedy was elected he built up our conventional forces with an emphasis on counterinsurgency. He created the Green Berets and the Navy Seals were formed as a naval counterpart to the Green Berets. By the time of Kennedy's death Johnson had a ready made army at his disposal. In August 1964 Johnson based his response to the Gulf of Tonkin incident on a lie. He had formed plans for heavy air raids on North Vietnam in the Spring but they felt that they would need some kind of provocation to justify these attacks in the eyes of the American people. On August 2, and 4, North Vietnamese torpedo boats supposedly attacked U.S. Navy destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. The attack on the 2nd occurred but it is pretty certain that the attack on the 4th never happened. Knowing this Johnson approached congress for a war resolution that would basically give him a free hand in regards to Vietnam. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed on August 7,1964. There were only 2 dissenting votes. Senator Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska. Morse tried to warn his fellow Senators that they should wait until there was a further investigation into the incident because Johnson couldn't be trusted but he was unsuccessful.

  LBJ knew that he had two wars to fight. The War on Poverty and the War in Vietnam. He believed that America was rich and powerful enough to fight both. Johnson's preference was the War on Poverty. Out of frustration he would call Vietnam that "bitch of a war". In order to pull off fighting both wars he had to manage them in such a way that would avoid too much attention by the American people. Having a ready made professional army at his disposal he was able to expand the war so gradually that he could avoid a draft. At least for a few years. When the draft came two thirds of the men who served in Vietnam were volunteers and the remaining third were drafted. Most men were drafted from poor and working class families. They were usually from under represented congressional districts. Finally in order to make the draft fairer a lottery system was devised on December 1, 1969. The first since 1942. I joined the Air Force in January 1968 and was inducted on August 5, 1968. If I wasn't proactive I would likely be drafted. I was very patriotic but I felt that the war was being mismanaged and never doubted that I would serve in some capacity. This wasn't my fathers war. It was much more complicated than that. As it was I nearly ended up in Vietnam in the Air Force. Most of the men in my unit were either going to Vietnam or coming back. I would listen to their war stories with interest. Air Force Security policemen were tasked with Air Base Ground Defense. They endured primarily rocket and mortar attacks. Occasionally they would fight off perimeter penetrations by Viet Cong sappers. Security Police would fight off massive attacks all across Vietnam during the 1968 Tet Offensive at places like Ton Son Nhut and Bien Hoa air bases. Many Security Policemen won the Silver Star for bravery and many were killed and wounded. I always expected that I would end up in Vietnam and had resigned myself to it. So many in my unit were going to Vietnam and Southeast Asia that an Airman wrote a letter of complaint to his congressman. After an investigation myself and four other Airmen were the first in our unit to go to somewhere other than Southeast Asia. One was sent to Canada, one to Greece, and the rest of us received orders to Tuslog Detachment 93 in Turkey.

Air Force Security Policemen fighting off a Viet Cong attack during the Tet Offensive in 1968 

 Another aspect of Johnson's deception was that he would not need to call out the National Guard and the Reserves. This is why so many men flocked to the Guard and Reserves in order to avoid service in Vietnam and their image suffered for many years as a result. Reservists were considered draft dodgers. Johnson was also dead set against raising taxes in order to pay for the war. He was also determined to keep inflation under control. So determined that when he heard that egg farmers were wanting to raise prices he manufactured a false report that eggs were high in cholesterol which sent the price of eggs plummeting. It was during the Vietnam War and the War on Poverty that Johnson began the practice of raiding the social security surplus in order to finance these wars while keeping taxes low. A practice that every president and congress since Johnson has used, to our detriment, for financing the government. The massive spending of the 1960's and early 70's would eventually lead the out of control inflationary cycle of the late 1970's and early 80's.  

  Johnson's generals along with William Westmoreland issued upbeat reports on the progress of the war. Our first troop commitment that signaled a shift to an American takeover of ground combat, occurred in March 1965 when the Marines landed at Da Nang. By January 1968 we had 500,000 troops in country. By then we were actually hurting the Viet Cong and it was decided by General Giap to launch an all out attack on the major population centers. Westmoreland wanted to send the bulk of our forces into the rural areas on search and destroy missions. Lt. General Frederick Weyand fortunately decided to disobey orders and kept American forces concentrated around the cities. The Tet Offensive began on January 30th 1968 and was conducted in three phases that lasted until September 23, 1968. Eighty thousand Viet Cong attacked 100 cities. At first American and South Vietnamese forces suffered setbacks but after a few days it was evident that our troops had the upper hand. The US inflicted massive casualties on the Viet Cong. It would take a month of hard fighting to liberate the city of Hue. Thousands of civilians were murdered by the Communists. By the end of the offensive the Viet Cong was destroyed as an effective fighting force. They would no longer be a major factor in the war. From that point on the North Vietnamese Regular Army would do most of the fighting. TET was a tactical and strategic victory for American forces. It was very similar to our victory over the Germans at the Battle of the Bulge. We were initially surprised but in the end it was a devastating defeat for the enemy. The American media reported it as if it were a defeat. This is when Walter Cronkite reported that it was his opinion that we were losing. Johnson supposedly made the comment that if he had lost Cronkite he had lost the nation. Personally I believe that it can be proven that he still had the support of the silent majority. Americans wanted to win and they were not willing to see the sacrifice of so many men and women go for nothing. TET was a shock to the American people. We were told that we were winning and then the enemy was able to mount a major offensive. The Germans were thought to be defeated when they launched Operation Watch on the Rhine which resulted in the Battle of the Bulge. Like Tet we destroyed their attack but there was a different press to deal with back then. 

  Johnson decided that he could not be re-elected in 1968. I was watching the speech when he declared that "I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president". Like most people I was shocked. In this speech Johnson declared a partial bombing halt and announced the opening of unilateral peace talks. America at this moment snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. In spite of Johnson's mishandling of the war we were putting a hurt on the Viet Cong. This was the reason that Giap took desperate measures by launching the Tet Offensive in the first place. Johnson's announcement and subsequent actions signaled to the average American soldier that we were no longer interested in winning the war. The morale of the military took a nosedive. Nobody wanted to die for a losing effort. Discipline suffered and unpopular officers were being fragged. Drug use in the ranks skyrocketed which had a huge impact on the home front as these soldiers returned home, combined with the drug use glamorized by the Hippie movement and Hollywood.  Nixon was elected and in essence all he did was return to the earlier policy of John Kennedy which was Vietnamization. In 1972 American troop strength had fallen drastically and the war was for the most part being fought with Vietnamese troops and American air power. That year Giap tried again to overwhelm South Vietnam by launching the Eastertide Offensive led by the North Vietnamese Army. This offensive was destroyed by B-52 heavy bombers and South Vietnamese troops. Nixon would negotiate an end to the American involvement in January 1973. One assurance that Nixon made to the South Vietnamese was that if the North Vietnamese tried another takeover the United States would supply the air power to beat it back. The North Vietnamese took advantage of the political vacuum created by the Watergate scandal and were successful in overrunning South Vietnam in 1975. The Ford Administration was unable to fulfill Nixon's promise and the Democrats did what they are best at. They pulled the rug out from under South Vietnam by ending all financial support. America never lost on the battlefields of Vietnam. The war was lost here at home by Quislings and traitors. The Vietnam War was the catalyst for a takeover of the Democratic Party by the radical elements in 1972. The radicals over time have weeded out the conservative and moderate wings of the party until all that is left is the radicals. I believe that Johnson's expansion of the war and his mishandling of the war was the catalyst for the downward spiral that we find ourselves in today. So my final grade for the presidency of Lyndon Johnson is this. In the area of Civil Rights he gets an A. For the War on Poverty and the War in Vietnam he gets an F.           



Thursday, September 10, 2015

Bobby Jindal Tells The Truth About Trump


  Bobby Jindal, governor of Louisiana aid the following about Trump today. Donald Trump is a narcissist and an egomaniac. That may sound like a serious charge to make, but it is also something that everyone knows to be true, and he knows it too, and he celebrates it. He told us the other day that he’s likes Kanye West, why? “Because Kanye loves Trump.” He may be an entertaining narcissist, but he is one nonetheless.

  Like all narcissists, Donald Trump is insecure and weak, and afraid of being exposed. And that’s why he is constantly telling us how big and how rich and how great he is, and how insignificant everyone else is. We’ve all met people like Trump, and we know that only a very weak and small person needs to constantly tell us how strong and powerful he is. Donald Trump believes that he is the answer to every question…

The conservative cause deserves more than a power-hungry shark who eats whatever is in front of him…because sooner or later, we will be his next meal.

  Of all the criticisms that I have heard from the other candidates this hits the nail on the head. Jindal is exactly right about Trump. However this is the question that I would ask him and all the others that are running for president. If Trump is rejected by the electorate who is going to take his place? Who out there is going to actually lead and sooth the anger that the average American feels right now? Who is going to reverse and repudiate the disastrous policies of this despicable president that has steamrolled America without any Republican opposition at all for the last six and a half years. Is it you Jindal or is this just a political game that you are playing to be noticed so you can rise above your 1% poll ratings and become viable? Is it going to be Bush, Kasich, Walker, Christie, Perry, or Huckabee just to name a few? In my own mind I am down to two that I could pull the lever for right now. That is Cruz and Fiorina. That is not to say that I wouldn't vote for a couple of others but they have some proving to do. Still I would like to see just one candidate for president, if they are elected, fight for us. The angry American. The American that the politically correct crowd offends every single day at the expense of those that they avoid offending. Never mind that we are the majority of the population. That doesn't matter a wit to Democrat or Republican leaders alike. I will take a narcissist that is stuck on himself over a socialist, radical Muslim sympathizing narcissist any day of the week. Tell me how Trump can harm this country more than it has been harmed already?

Sunday, September 6, 2015

Judicial Tyranny

Kim Davis

  Kim Davis is just another victim of our out of control court system. For those who say that she deserves to be in jail or she should just step down from her position I would suggest that she and others should never have been placed in this position to begin with. I learned a long time ago, as a political science minor at M.T.S.U. that there are three branches of government and they are not equal. I would be willing to bet that my professor was a liberal but at least he taught the truth. Most people have been taught that the three branches of government are co-equal. The truth is that the constitution grants the legislature supremacy over the executive and the judiciary. This is why the legislature is mentioned first in Article 1 of the constitution. Article 2 deals with the executive and Article 3, the judicial. The Founders were so afraid of judicial tyranny that many wanted to leave a judicial system out of the Constitution altogether. John Marshall supposedly established judicial review through his ruling of Marbury vs. Madison in 1803. It is the process by which a law is nullified when the court decides it to be unconstitutional or in conflict with the Constitution. Some scholars argue that judicial review was already written into the Constitution and others argue that Marshall was the author of it in America. The concept actually dates back to England.

 Marbury Vs. Madison was the result of a lawsuit filed by William Marbury. John Adams was defeated by Thomas Jefferson. As a lame duck president he made last minute judicial appointments to insure a Federalist dominated judiciary. Marbury was commissioned as a Justice of the Peace but it was not delivered to him before Jefferson occupied the White House. As a result the Jefferson administration denied him the position. Marbury filed his lawsuit directly with the Supreme Court instead of going to a lower court. Marshall ruled that Marbury's commission was valid but the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the case. In my humble opinion Marshall fashioned a decision that insured his place as a Federalist Chief Justice and secured the power of the court. He did this while avoiding a head to head showdown with an Anti-Federalist president. Marbury would never occupy his post as Justice of the Peace. Jefferson disagreed with Marshall's decision because it granted the court too much power. In a letter to Marshall he wrote, You seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.
Thomas Jefferson

John Marshall

The following are just some of the really bad decisions that have altered the course of American history.

1.The Dred Scott Decision (1857)- Chief Justice Roger Taney tried to settle the slavery issue once and for all by declaring that Scott, a slave, could not sue for his freedom in a Federal court because a person of African descent could not claim citizenship and had no legal standing under the constitution. This decision nullified the anti-slavery provisions of the Northwest Ordinance. It also declared the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. This ruling infuriated Northerners, increased sectional division and hastened the onset of the Civil War.
Roger Taney

2. Plessey Vs. Ferguson (1896) - Homer Plessey, a biracial man, who was only one eighth African descent, challenged Louisiana's segregation laws by riding in the white section of a train in 1892. In a landmark 7 to 1 decision the court upheld segregation, in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment it declared that a state could separate by race as long as it provided facilities that were separate but equal. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendment granted blacks the same rights as all citizens but this atrocious decision insured segregation until the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This Act was simply a reaffirmation of the 14th Amendment. The Court got it right however in 1954 with Brown Vs. the Board of Education ruling. This decision started the ball rolling toward desegregation but it would take the Civil Rights Act to get it done.
Homer Plessey

3. Everson Vs. the Board of Education (1947) - This was a case that stood the 1st Amendment on it's head. A private citizen of New Jersey filed suit because his school district used taxpayer funds to reimburse parents that used city buses to transport their children to both public and private Catholic schools. This was a five to four decision which ruled that the 1st Amendment applied not only to the Federal government but to the states. It established a mythical (wall of separation) between the church and the government. The actual wall of separation was between the Federal government and the states. The states are free to worship in anyway that they choose. For example a state can have an established religion if it wants to. It can also legitimize the placing of religious symbols on government property like nativity scenes or the Ten Commandments. The state can authorize prayer in school and other religious activities without interference from the Federal government. This was the original meaning of the 1st Amendment. Because of this illegal ruling the government has established freedom from religion rather than freedom of religion. Personally I believe that Justice Hugo Black, a former member of the Alabama KKK injected his anti-Catholic bias into this decision.
Hugo Black

4. Roe vs. Wade (1973) - This decision along with Doe Vs. Bolton, and Planned Parenthood Vs. Casey in essence legalized abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. Over fifty million people have died in this holocaust. Jane Roe and Mary Doe who were the plaintiffs in these cases have since become staunch ant-abortion advocates who were exploited by radical feminists. Both women had unwanted pregnancies but they would eventually deliver healthy babies. Their respective state laws at the time prevented them from getting a legal abortion. Mary Doe never even granted permission to go forward with her case. This was another example of the court usurping the power to legislate from the bench. The court invented a woman's right to privacy out of thin air. As in Dred Scott the court ruled that an unborn baby has no legal standing under the United States Constitution. A baby is easier to kill when it is considered less than human.
Jane Roe

Mary Doe

5. Lawrence Vs. Texas (2003) This case struck down state sodomy laws and overturned a previous Supreme Court ruling in Bowers Vs. Hardwick that upheld a Georgia anti-sodomy law. Although I believe that consenting adults should be able to have sex in the privacy of their bedroom, sexual activity was declared a fundamental right guaranteed by the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. This set the stage for same sex marriage. Later that year the State Supreme Court of Massachusetts in spite of the fact that a poll showed that 66% of the population were opposed to same sex marriage declared it legal Since that time the majority of the states have passed referendums opposing same sex marriage and activists courts have one by one overruled the will of the people in these states. This includes wild and woolly California that overwhelmingly voted against same sex marriage. Marriage is a prerogative of the state. In addition the equal protection clause under the 14th Amendment cannot be granted to homosexuals until it can be proven beyond a doubt that homosexuality is biological trait and not learned behavior or a mental disorder. The recent ruling to legalize same sex marriage was outside the jurisdiction of the courts and it sets the stage for the legalization of plural marriages, incestuous marriages, and marriages between humans and animals.

6. Keo vs. City of New London- (2005) - This case involves the issue of imminent domain. Historically imminent domain has been when the government has to take private property in order to build a bridge, a road, interstate highway, or a railroad for example. Imminent domain was covered under the 5th Amendment which provided just compensation to the owner of private property taken by the government. Also the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies. This decision however changed the law to mean that a private owner has to transfer his property to another private owner if it can be shown that the transfer will benefit the community at large. For example a Wal-Mart can acquire your property because it will employ people and increase tax revenue. 

7. The Obamacare ruling - This ruling forced American citizens to buy a product that they do not want. The court also declared a fine a tax and it was declared legal because government has a constitutional right to tax. Obamacare has always been opposed by the great majority of the American people but it has been rammed down our throats. Health insurance is not a fundamental right. This ruling upheld a system that is in the process of destroying the greatest health care system in the world. It is also expanding our deficit at an alarming rate.

  In conclusion our court system has imposed judicial tyranny on America. It has become exactly what our Founding Fathers feared and what Thomas Jefferson warned us about. Kim Davis is one of many victims of judicial tyranny. Republicans and Democrats alike are calling for her to step down or to accept the law and to do her job. Their job is to uphold the Constitution. Not to create new law. We have a legislature for that.