Israel Military Forum

Welcome to the Israel Military Forum. You are currently viewing our Israel Forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, Image Forum and access our other features. By joining our Israel Military Forum you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so
Join Our Israel Community Today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go Back   Israel Military Forum > Social > World News > North America
Register FAQ Pictures Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-03-2016, 02:02 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation The Secret Racist History of the Democratic Party

The Secret Racist History of the Democratic Party
Democrats have long erased their sordid racist history from our textbooks, but if you go back to original source documents, the entire shocking truth is available.
By Kimberly Bloom Jackson


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...tic_party.html


Have you heard of Josiah Walls or Hiram Rhodes Revels? How about Joseph Hayne Rainey? If not, you’re not alone. I taught history and I never knew half of our nation’s past until I began to re-educate myself by learning from original source materials, rather than modern textbooks written by progressive Democrats with an agenda.

Interestingly, Democrats have long ago erased these historic figures from our textbooks, only to offer deceitful propaganda and economic enticements in an effort to convince people, especially black Americans, that it’s the Democrats rather than Republicans who are the true saviors of civil liberties. Luckily, we can still venture back into America’s real historical record to find that facts are stubborn things. Let’s take a closer look.

An 1872 print (http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/98501907/) by Currier and Ives depicts the first seven black Americans (http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Ame.../dp/0393015130) elected to the U.S. Congress during the Reconstruction period of 1865 to 1877-- and they’re all Republican!

From left to right:

  • Sen. Hiram Rhodes Revels, R-MS (1822-1901): Already an ordained minister, Revels ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/revelsh.pdf ) served as an army chaplain and was responsible for recruiting three additional regiments during the Civil War. He was also elected to the Mississippi Senate in 1869 and the U.S. Senate in 1870, making him America’s first black senator.
  • Rep. Benjamin Turner, R-AL (1825-1894): Within just five years, Turner ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/turnerb.pdf ) went from slave to wealthy businessman. He also became a delegate to the Alabama Republican State Convention of 1867 and a member of the Selma City Council in 1868. In 1871, Turner was even elected to the U.S. Congress.
  • Rep. Robert DeLarge, R-SC (1842-1874): Although born a slave, DeLarge ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/delarger.pdf ) chaired the Republican Platform Committee in 1867 and served as delegate at the Constitutional Convention of 1868. From 1868 to 1870, he was also elected to the State House of Representatives and later Congress, serving from 1871 to 1873.
  • Rep. Josiah Walls, R-FL (1842-1905): Walls ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/wallsj.pdf ) was a slave who was forced (http://www.amazon.com/Setting-Record...ing+the+record) to fight for the Confederate Army until he was captured by Union troops. He promptly enlisted with the Union and eventually became an officer. In 1870, he was elected to the U.S. Senate. Unfortunately, harassing Democrats questioned his qualifications until he was officially expelled. Although he was re-elected after the first legal challenge, Democrats took control of Florida and Walls was prohibited from returning altogether.
  • Rep. Jefferson Long, R-GA (1836-1901): Long ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/longj.pdf ) was also born into slavery, and he too became a successful business man. However, when Democrats boycotted (http://www.amazon.com/Setting-Record...ing+the+record) his business he suffered substantial financial loses. But that didn’t stop Long, who in 1871 became the first black representative to deliver a congressional speech in the U.S. House.
  • Rep. Joseph Hayne Rainey, R-SC (1832-1887): Although born a slave, Rainey ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/raineyj.pdf ) became the first black Speaker of the U.S. House for a brief period in 1870. In fact, he served in Congress longer than any other black America at that time.
  • Rep. Robert Brown Elliot, R-SC (1842-1884): Elliot ( http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/elliottr.pdf ) helped to organize the Republican Party throughout rural South Carolina. He was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1870 and reelected in 1872. In 1874, he was elected to the State House of Representatives and eventually served as Speaker of the House in the State Legislature.

Clearly, the latter half of the 19th Century, and for much of the early half of the 20th Century, it was the Republican Party that was the party of choice for blacks. How can this be? Because the Republican Party was formed in the late 1850s as an oppositional force to the pro-slavery Democratic Party. Republicans wanted to return to the principles that were originally established in the republic’s founding documents and in doing so became the first party to openly advocated strong civil rights legislation. Voters took notice and in 1860 Abraham Lincoln was elected President along with a Republican Congress. This infuriated the southern Democrats, who soon afterwards left Congress and took their states with them to form what officially became known as The Slaveholding Confederate States of America.

Meanwhile, Republicans pushed full steam ahead. Take, for example, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution that officially abolished slavery in 1864. Of the 118 Republicans in Congress (House (https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag...001&linkText=1) and Senate (https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag...001&linkText=1)) at the time, all 118 voted in favor of the legislation, while only 19 of 82 Democrats voted likewise. Then there’s the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments guaranteeing rights of citizenship and voting to black males. Not a single Democrat voted in favor of either the Fourteenth (House - https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag...833&linkText=1 and Senate - https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag...505&linkText=1) or Fifteenth (House - https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag...001&linkText=1 and Senate - https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampag...001&linkText=1) Amendments.

In spite of this, in almost every Southern state, the Republican Party was actually formed by blacks, not whites. Case in point is Houston, Texas, where 150 blacks and 20 whites created the Republican Party of Texas (https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/wmafr). But perhaps most telling of all with respect to the Republican Party’s achievements is that black men were continuously elected (http://www.amazon.com/Reconstruction.../dp/0060937165) to public office. For example, 42 blacks were elected to the Texas legislature, 112 in Mississippi, 190 in South Carolina, 95 representatives and 32 senators in Louisiana, and many more elected in other states -- all Republican. Democrats didn’t elect their first black American to the U.S. House until 1935!

Political Gangs With Pointy Hoods

By the mid-1860s, the Republican Party’s alliance with blacks had caused a noticeable strain on the Democrats’ struggle for electoral significance in the post-Civil War era. This prompted the Democratic Party in 1866 to develop a new pseudo-secret political action group whose sole purpose was to help gain control of the electorate. The new group was known simply by their initials, KKK (Ku Klux Klan).

This political relationship was nationally solidified shortly thereafter during the 1868 Democratic National Convention when former Civil War General Nathan Bedford Forrest (https://archive.org/details/invisibleempires00hornrich) was honored as the KKK’s first Grand Wizard. But don’t bother checking the Democratic National Committee’s website for proof. For many years, even up through the 2012 Presidential Election, the DNC had omitted (http://www.amazon.com/Setting-Record...ing+the+record) all related history from 1848 to 1900 from their timeline -- half a century worth! Now, for the 2016 election cycle, they’ve scratched even more history. Apparently, they believe it’s easier to just lie and claim (https://www.democrats.org/about/our-history) to have fought for civil rights for over 200 hundred years, while seeing fit to list only a select few distorted events as exemplary, beginning as late as the 1920s. Incredibly, the DNC conveniently jumps past more than 100 years of American history!

Nevertheless, this sordid history is still well documented. There’s even a thirteen-volume set of Congressional investigations dating from 1872 detailing the Klan’s connection to the Democratic Party. The official documents (https://books.google.com/books?id=JS...states&f=false), titled Report of the Joint Select Committee to Inquire Into the Condition of Affairs in the Late Insurrectionary States, irrefutably proves the KKK’s prominent role in the Democratic Party.

One of the most vivid examples of collusion between the KKK and Democratic Party was when Democrat Senator Wade Hampton ran for the governorship of South Carolina in 1876. The Klan put into action a battle plan to help Democrats win, stating (http://www.amazon.com/Setting-Record...g+the+record): “Every Democrat must feel honor bound to control the vote of at least one Negro by intimidation…. Democrats must go in as large numbers…and well-armed.” An issue of Harper’s Weekly that same year illustrated this mindset with a depiction of two white Democrats standing next to a black man while pointing a gun at him. At the bottom of the depiction is a caption (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/exh...ction5_18.html) that reads: “Of Course He Wants To Vote The Democratic Ticket!”


This is reminiscent of the 2008 Presidential election when members of the New Black Panther Party (see video 1 at bottom of this post) hung out at a Philadelphia precinct wielding big batons.


The Klan’s primary mission was to intimidate Republicans -- black and white. In South Carolina, for example, the Klan even passed out “push cards (http://www.amazon.com/Setting-Record...g+the+record)” -- a hit list of 63 (50 blacks and 13 whites) “Radicals” of the legislature pictured on one side and their names listed on the other. Democrats called Republicans radicals not just because they were a powerful political force, but because they allowed blacks to participate in the political process. Apparently, this was all too much for Democrats to bear.

By 1875, Republicans, both black and white, had worked together to pass over two dozen civil rights bills. Unfortunately, their momentum came to a screeching halt in 1876 when the Democratic Party took control of Congress. Hell bent on preventing blacks from voting, Southern Democrats devised nearly a dozen shady schemes, like requiring literacy tests, misleading election procedures, redrawing election lines, changing polling locations, creating white-only primaries, and even rewriting state constitutions. Talk about disenfranchising black voters!

There were also lynchings, but not what you might think. According to the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, between 1882 and 1964 an estimated 3,446 blacks and 1,279 whites were lynched (http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/project...ingsstate.html) at the hands of the Klan.

Today, the Democratic Party no longer needs the help of political gangs wearing pointy hoods to do their dirty work. Instead, they do it themselves. You may recall the case of black Tea Party activist Kenneth Gladney, who was brutally beaten by two SEIU members (see video 2 at bottom of this post) during a 2009 health care town hall meeting. In February 2011, a union thug with Communications Workers of America (see video 3 below) was caught on tape physically assaulting a young female FreedomWorks activist in Washington, DC. Then in 2012, Michigan Education Association President Steve Cook (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012...uble-standard/) jumped on the protest bandwagon against the state’s new right-to-work legislation stating, “Whoever votes for this is not going to have any peace for the next two years.” An even worse threat was issued on the floor of the Michigan House of Representatives the next day by Democratic Representative Douglas Geiss (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...mocracy/print/) who charged, “There will be blood!”

As we forge ahead into this critical 2016 election season, let us not forget the real history of America when blacks and whites, primarily Republicans, worked side by side defending the rights and dignity of all Americans. It’s a history that has been kept out of the history books--a history that today’s Democrats routinely lie about while promptly pointing their finger at Republicans, calling white Republicans racists and black Republicans Uncle Toms. This is because Democrats have a secret past that must be protected and an agenda that must be fulfilled. If history is any indication of what the future might hold, brace yourself. There will be some in the Democratic Party who will be prepared to do whatever it takes to silence any opposition.

Video 1:

Video 2:


Video 3:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/zm_Fl3AszuU

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...tic_party.html

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 05-03-2016 at 03:08 PM..
  #42  
Old 05-04-2016, 03:05 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Formerly powerful Democrat in NY State sentenced to 12 years in the federal pen

Formerly Powerful Democrat in NY State Sentenced to 12 Years in the Federal Pen
By Thomas Lifson


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...deral_pen.html


There are likely to be close to zero mainstream media references to a “culture of corruption” if this news even gets reported. Irene Plagianos (https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/abo...rene-plagianos) and Radhika Marya (https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/abo.../radhika-marya) of DNA info:

Former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/people/sheldon-silver), once one of New York's most powerful politicians, was sentenced to 12 years in federal prison Tuesday following his conviction on corruption charges.

Judge Valerie Caproni also ruled that Silver must pay a $1.75 million fine and forfeit $5 million, the net amount of money prosecutors said he earned through two kickback schemes. Silver was told to surrender to prison by noon on July 1.

"Corruption attacks the very heart of our system of government," Caproni said, adding that her sentence would send a message that "corruption is going to be dealt with seriously."

Before he was sentenced, Silver spoke briefly in a quiet voice, saying that he "let down" his family, colleagues and constituents.

“Shelly” Silver, as he was almost universally known along his many, many friends in the New York Democratic Party, represented Lower Manhattan (aka, Wall Street) in the State Assembly for 40 years. He ran the State Assembly, and if you think what he was caught at was the sole indiscretion of an otherwise virtuous life, and unusual in anything but the size of his money grab, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you.

At the center of Silver's downfall was the issue of how business and politics intermingle in Albany. Prosecutors said Silver abused his power for personal gain, while defense attorneys argued that Silver was acting within the law, even if people were uncomfortable with a system that allows for legislators to earn an outside salary.

Prosecutors said Silver had earned kickbacks through work he professed to do for personal injury law firm Weitz & Luxenberg.

In that scheme, prosecutors said Columbia doctor, Robert Taub, would send patients with mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, to the firm via Silver. The doctor would receive $500,000 in research money, while Silver earned referral fees.

In addition, prosecutors said Silver took what he considered referral fees from a real estate tax law firm while directing tax breaks to two developers, including the state's largest political donor, Glenwood Management.

During the trial, prosecutors said Silver lied about his work by claiming none of his clients had business with the state, though he was being lobbied by Glenwood.

Along with the corruption presented at trial, the judge also considered evidence recently unsealed that showed Silver had two extramarital affairs with women who had business before the state (https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/201...aled-docs-show).

Hat tip: Clarice Feldman

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...deral_pen.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 05-04-2016 at 03:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-05-2016, 02:23 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation It’s Hillary For the Dems (For Now)

It’s Hillary For the Dems (For Now)
Democrat elites will rue the day that they helped grease the skids for Hillary. They’ll rue putting the screws to every viable – or seemingly viable – alternative to Plastic Hillary
By J. Robert Smith



http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...s_for_now.html


Sure, the big takeaway on Tuesday night was Donald Trump’s Indiana win and Ted Cruz bowing out. But the big understated story was Hillary losing Indiana to Larry David. Make that Bern Sanders, the trollish Brooklyn socialist who senators from boutique leftist Vermont.

In the late autumn of the nominating process, Hillary, a pseudo-icon of the Democratic Party establishment, can’t close the deal with… Democrats. Indiana should have been a cakewalk for Hillary. Her party’s rank and file never much liked the cut of her jib, though. Not in ’08 and not now. And not, further back, when she was First Lady and Travelgating or Vince Fostering.

Hillary is created from plastic mold injection. Though her little self isn’t much suitable for dashboards. She smolders and shrieks. She shrugs about the impact of killing coal. (After all, it takes a village to make a pogrom.) She left Americans for dead in Benghazi. She made a bigger mess in the Middle East. She committed a “YUGE” felony with her server. She and her husband, Clyde – Bill – run a fancy-named shakedown operation called the Clinton Foundation (https://www.clintonfoundation.org/). This shady dynamic duo raked in big bucks from Wall Street while denouncing Wall Street. Hillary’s heart may be left but her bank account dictates anything. Whore my not quite capture everything Hillary is.

Of course, the Democratic establishment rigged its party’s nominating process. So-called super delegates make a big difference in determining the nominee. Democrat elites will rue the day that they helped grease the skids for Hillary. They’ll rue putting the screws to every viable – or seemingly viable – alternative to Plastic Hillary. Okay, so Joe Biden is sort of laughable. Liz Warren is another leftist inbred. But either might have had a better shot at the capturing the White House than phony-baloney, one day-criminal-case study Hill.

That brings us to November. Hillary’s a dead candidate walking. Got it. Feelings are bruised among the #NeverTrump crowd. Glenn Beck and Eric Erickson are mulling fighting a lost war in jungle mountains. George Will might commit seppuku at the base of the Lincoln Memorial. Disaster, they and others of their ilk say, awaits Republicans when Trump squares off against Clinton the Lesser.

Once conservative true-believers and establishment Republicans took The Donald seriously, the spin throughout much of the GOP nominating process was that Hillary, in cahoots with her Democrats and the MSM, would make mincemeat of The Donald. The hyperbole was understandable (let’s hope it was just hyperbole rather than Kool-aid drinking among those who should know better). The game was winning votes, and persuading voters any-which-way was the way.

The facts, which matter – and not just to Joe Friday – are that Trump was one underestimated guy from the nanosecond he announced (no exception for this scribe). He made quick work of establishment favorite, Jeb!. He sent an overmatched Marco back to the Sunshine State. Over time, Trump ground down the smart and tenacious Ted Cruz. He beat Ted in states that were Ted’s natural turf (the Deep South). He beat him in blue Northeast states, holding out the prospect of siphoning off lunch-bucket independents and disaffected Democrats. He battled and won in much of the Midwest, the capstone being his coup de grace to Ted in Hoosier Country.

Trump contested everywhere, he communicated without fear of, and, often, in conflict with, the MSM. He even mud-wrestled Fox’s Megyn Kelly (advantage, Trump). He took to social media, brilliantly exploiting that medium in trailblazing fashion. His stump “speeches” were rambling conversations with his massive audiences, who ate it up. Love or hate Trump, the guy is, well, a phenomenon.

Trump’s nomination will remake the GOP and may well realign national politics. Rather than sulking, movement conservatives should do everything they can to invest Trump’s campaign with strong conservative values, ideas, and proposals. (Note that leftists never leave the field after a setback. They keep on keeping on.) Here’s a wager: Ted Cruz is gonna back The Donald. Ted will grasp the possibilities.

Bernie Sanders has won 17 state contests and a plentitude of votes against a Democrat sure-thing. He ignored the memo about Hill’s coronation, to his great advantage. Survey research, focus groups, and man-in-the-street interviews with Bern’s backers tell the same tale: his voters don’t like or trust Hillary, verging on or at intensely. Not all of Bern’s supporters are Red Millenials, either. Many are protest-voting, using Bern as a place to park their votes against the Wicked Witch of Chappaqua. They may be gettable for Trump – or just stay home come November. The Democratic vote is depressed and not by a little bit.

The true story of Hillary is that she’s a ham-handed pol, and transparently self-serving. So is her husband, but charm papers over a lot. Distasteful to this proud Dragon Lady but inescapable, Hill’s a national figure because she rode her beau’s coattails for years. Otherwise, she’s connived, backstabbed, and assassinated whoever got in her way or was inconvenient to get to the top. She lacks scruples on a scale that Dick Nixon never began to reach.

Oh, and did we mention that Hillary may yet be indicted? Or, at least, a referral to indict may come from the FBI for felonies related to mishandling state secrets and, perhaps, her pay-to-play foundation? There’s a chance Hillary may not make it to November at all.

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...s_for_now.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 05-05-2016 at 02:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-07-2016, 07:20 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Vote Communist, Vote Democrat

Vote Communist, Vote Democrat




Book Description Like a majority of Americans, the author has become very concerned about his country and its future as a land of liberty. While collecting the information for the book, it opened up an unexpected door to the actual dangers we are facing today. However, once one learns the truth, then one must realize they have a personal responsibility of sharing this truth with the people of this nation. Those fears are the very reason for sharing this book with you. “Vote Communist Vote Democrat” brings out the real political desires of the Democrat Party. Has America's current political position come about by some accident or is it by design, by purpose? “America's decline under Obama isn't due to mistake or ignorance. It's a purposeful, brilliant plan to destroy capitalism, America's exceptionalism.” The Communist USA organization states they are directing the Democratic Party. Pravda, the Moscow Communist daily newspaper declared “America’s descent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed. The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama.” Long-term effects of Democrat Party’s goals will Lead America to destruction as a Godless nation. Ezra Taft Benson said, “If our nation is destroyed, it will be because of internal forces.” President Ronald Reagan warned us “If we forget we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.” Is God a part of America this day? “Vote Communism Vote Democrat” brings out the unknown facts that Obama’s failed domestic and foreign policies are purposely designed to bring down America, to collapse our economy, and to destroy the middle class and the family. His design for a moral decline of America is no accident. His domestic policies are created to ensure there will only be two economic classes of citizens, the poor and the elite. It is premeditated by the Democratic leadership, planning to transform us from a Republic into a One World government, a nation who will no longer believe in the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Thereby, when citizens vote for the Democrat Party, they are allowing the government to overtake the rules and principles of liberty. Within the book, the author clearly defines the end purpose and goal of World Communism. Explains the meaning of liberty as the free agency of man and how it is their design to control man. The author shares with the reader how Christianity is the principal religion the communists must eliminate. The meaning and purpose of the phrase “Spirit of America” is deeply defined. Lastly, the book explains the very reason for the existence of a country called America and its key purpose and role as a nation in the world. Both the USA Communist Party and the Democrat Party are at War with America and both are at war with God. To gain control of America is the number one goal of the communists to bring about a global government. As long as America believes in Exceptionalism there can never be a communist world government. To destroy and take over our nation they must destroy our belief in American Exceptionalism they must control the Constitution, our liberty, break apart the family, impede our heritage, and last to destroy Christianity. Once this is accomplished the world will be in their hands. “Vote Communist Vote Democrat” presents facts to address America's plight towards communism. After reading this book, the author hopes you will accept and take upon yourself a personal responsibility to disclose the truth to the voters about the dangers facing America. If you are not willing to accept this calling, there may no longer be an America for future generations. As Edmund Burke tells us, for evil to exist, good men only need to do nothing. Our Founding Fathers were men not willing to allow evil to exist. They pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor for an unheard of, an undefined America, never fearing the consequences. Question: what are you willing to give for your country for liberty?

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-19-2016, 09:01 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Bernie’s thug life

BERNIE’S THUG LIFE
Why Sanders is lying when he says he doesn’t approve of violence perpetrated on his behalf.
By Matthew Vadum


http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2629...-matthew-vadum


The reason Bernie Sanders pointedly refuses to condemn his supporters for throwing chairs and making death threats against Democrat officials at and after the party’s Nevada convention is because he doesn’t actually object to their violent behavior.

Sanders blew off pressure from Democrat leaders to disavow ugly tactics by his supporters at the event Saturday evening, calling the complaints “nonsense” and arguing that his supporters were not treated with "fairness and respect."

Remember that Sanders is seeking the presidential nomination from a party that officially endorsed (http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2599...-matthew-vadum) the pro-cop-killing Black Lives Matter movement and whose leaders swooned over the even more violent Occupy Wall Street movement. As the unrest in Ferguson, Mo.. and Baltimore showed the nation, these people believe that rioting and looting are legitimate forms of political activism.

The pro-violence radicalism among Sanders supporters comes straight from the top. The Vermont senator vocally supports (http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/26...iel-greenfield) unrepentant Marxist terrorist Oscar López Rivera whom he describes as “one of the longest-serving political prisoners in history — 34 years, longer than Nelson Mandela.”

Sanders told a town hall meeting in Puerto Rico that if Obama doesn’t release López Rivera, “I will pardon him” if elected president.

Here is what the longtime prisoner did:

“López Rivera conspired to transport explosives with intent to destroy federal government property and committed other related crimes — or that the [Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional Puertorriqueña terrorist group] was deemed responsible for a reign of terror that killed six people and injured 130 others in at least 114 bombings. They includes the 1975 bombing of historic Fraunces Tavern in the city’s Financial District, which left four people dead and wounded more than 50 others, and a New Year’s Eve 1982 bombing at Police Headquarters that maimed three NYPD cops who tried to defuse the explosives.

“On January 24, 1975, a ten-pound dynamite bomb planted by the FALN at Fraunces Tavern in lower Manhattan exploded, killing his father, 33-year-old Frank Connor. In 2011, Joe Connor attended a parole hearing for López Rivera in Terre Haute, Indiana. He and the other survivors of the FALN’s murder spree offered López Rivera ‘multiple opportunities’ to express remorse. He rebuffed all of them.”

That Sanders would support granting clemency to such a man tends to undermine his ad nauseam-repeated claim to be a “democratic socialist.” Ideologically, Sanders is a communist (http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2594...-matthew-vadum), though he never joined the party. Of course he is comfortable standing with a violent leftist revolutionary who waged war against the United States.

And like Barack Obama, Sanders pals around (http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2621...st-joe-kaufman) with terrorists and their backers. In March he met with the Florida chapter of the Muslim terrorist-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Sanders strongly supports (http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsro...pollo-alliance) the Apollo Alliance, a left-wing enviro-pork barrel group that wants the government to take over America's energy industry and one of whose leaders (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=7490) is Weather Underground terrorist Jeff Jones. Sanders honeymooned in the Soviet Union and is a fan of Fidel Castro and Daniel Ortega.

So when Sanders denounces violence, don’t be impressed: it is a tactic. Nothing more, nothing less.

Distancing himself from his unhinged followers would be both disingenuous and absurd of Sanders, reminiscent of Barack Obama’s half-hearted shrug after the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s crazed anti-American rants became headline news. “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community,” Obama said on the campaign trail in 2008 of his deranged pastor of 20 years.

Sanders is following the Saul Alinsky playbook. As an aide to the Rules for Radicals author wrote (http://spectator.org/38827_smallness-saul/), while Alinsky was shying away from praising violence in public and sounding “the trumpet blast for democracy,” in private “he would say that violence has its uses.” Saying you support politically motivated violence implies you don’t support democracy – so Bernie lies.

Note that he refused to apologize for – or even criticize – the actions of his supporters at the state convention. Like many leftist radicals, Sanders is skilled at bouncing between studied reverence for nonviolent action and refusing to condemn violent left-wing activism, which is a slippery way of endorsing violent left-wing activism. He offered a milquetoast, perfunctory, blanket condemnation of violence in general, the kind of thing any competent left-wing politician could do sleepwalking.

"Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals," Sanders said of the mostly peaceful convention.

He then rubbed salt in the wounds, complaining in detail about the perceived railroading his side experienced at the convention. "The Democratic leadership used its power to prevent a fair and transparent process from taking place," Sanders said.

Lying about violence comes naturally to left-wingers.

Although right-wing political violence doesn’t take place a lot in modern American politics, Sanders and the media want Americans to believe otherwise. This helps to explain why they falsely accused Tea Party groups of violence (and racism and other undesirable isms) during the fight over Obamacare. The right-wing populism spurred by Obama’s un-American policies presents an existential threat to the Left.

Sanders accuses Donald Trump’s supporters of unprovoked physical aggression against his supporters, while at the same time denying that he is encouraging his supporters to rough up Trump rally attendees.

Of course Sanders’ denials, however passionate at times, ring hollow. It is a longstanding practice of the Left to accuse its enemies of its own antisocial misdeeds in order to avoid accountability. (This is not to excuse or make light of the relatively few incidents in which Trump supporters have thrown punches at Sanders-supporting protesters, but for the most part fans of The Donald were trying to deal with obnoxious protesters who were disrupting Trump rallies. Excessive enthusiasm in cracking down on the rude is not the same as trying to prevent free speech and political expression.)

On the weekend, Sanders’ backers acted out their unhappiness with Nevada’s byzantine delegate-selection process. They became abusive (http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-pa...contest-2016-5) and physically aggressive as they tried to silence speakers like Hillary Clinton surrogate Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) with loud boos and profanities. The Nevada Democratic Party went as far as writing the Democratic National Committee accusing Sanders supporters of having a "penchant for extra-parliamentary behavior — indeed, actual violence — in place of democratic conduct in a convention setting."

According to one news report:

“Democratic officials released text messages and voicemails with threats against the Nevada Democratic Party chairwoman Roberta Lange. They included such comments as ‘Hey bitch, loved how you broke the system, we know where you live, where you work, where you eat, where your kids go to school ... You made a bad choice, prepare for hell, calls won't stop.’ Another one said, ’You're fired bitch, #FeelTheBern, speak or else, corrupt bitch, answer the phone you pussy.’"

Alarmed at the prospect of internecine violence, party elites put the heat on Sanders to denounce the obnoxious behavior forcefully.

"There is no excuse for what happened in Nevada, and it is incumbent upon all of us in positions of leadership to speak out," said Clinton marionette Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Florida congresswoman who heads the DNC.

“I grew up in Brooklyn. I’m not afraid of bullies,” Boxer said at the convention. “We need civility in the Democratic Party,” she said with a straight face. “Civility."

Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY's List, a pro-Clinton PAC, added, "These disgraceful attacks are straight out of the Donald Trump playbook, and Bernie Sanders is the only person who can put a stop to them. Sanders needs to both forcefully denounce and apologize for his supporters' unacceptable behavior — not walk away."

When left-wingers complain about the violent tactics other left-wingers use against them you just know something big is afoot.

It could be that the Democratic Party is just as fragmented, or even more bitterly divided, than the Republican Party.

Bernie Sanders is fine with that.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2629...-matthew-vadum
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 05-19-2016 at 09:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-24-2016, 02:33 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation CBS2 Investigation Uncovers Votes Being Cast From Grave Year After Year

CBS2 Investigation Uncovers Votes Being Cast From Grave Year After Year
By David Goldstein


http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/...ar-after-year/


LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — A comparison of records by David Goldstein, investigative reporter for CBS2/KCAL9, has revealed hundreds of so-called dead voters in Southern California, a vast majority of them in Los Angeles County.

“He took a lot of time choosing his candidates,” said Annette Givans of her father, John Cenkner.

Cenkner died in Palmdale in 2003. Despite this, records show that he somehow voted from the grave in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2010.

But he’s not the only one.

CBS2 compared millions of voting records from the California Secretary of State’s office with death records from the Social Security Administration and found hundreds of so-called dead voters.

Specifically, 265 in Southern California and a vast majority of them, 215, in Los Angeles County alone.

The numbers come from state records that show votes were cast in that person’s name after they died. In some cases, Goldstein discovered that they voted year after year.

Across all counties, Goldstein uncovered 32 dead voters who cast ballots in eight elections apiece, including a woman who died in 1988. Records show she somehow voted in 2014, 26 years after she passed away.

It remains unclear how the dead voters voted but 86 were registered Republicans, 146 were Democrats, including Cenkner.

“He’s a diehard Democrat, and I was thinking that if somebody was voting under his name, he’s probably rolling in his grave if they were voting Republican,” Givans said.

She said her dad always voted at the polls, only now records show someone else may be casting his vote.

“It just astounds me. I don’t understand how anybody can get away with that,” she said.

And then there’s Julita Abutin.

Records show she voted in Norwalk in 2014, 2012, 2010 and 2008 though she died in 2006.

Abutin’s daughter, Marivic, says it’s impossible that her mother voted.

But the Los Angeles County Registrar confirms they have signed vote-by-mail envelopes with her mother’s name for the 2014 and 2012 election, though she died 10 years ago.

Edward Carbajal Jr.’s father died in La Puente in 2001 but state records show a vote was cast in his father’s name in eight elections after he passed away.

It’s possible as a junior, election officials mistakenly attributed the vote to his father. There is no way to tell from CBS2’s data but he wonders why his dad is still registered.

“I mean, that should be something that everybody that’s involved with these types of things should know who’s alive and who isn’t,” he said.

The Los Angeles County Registrar told CBS2: “We remove 1200 to 2000 deceased records from the database per month.”

But the news station checked all of the dead voters from LA County on the Registrar’s website and found 212 of the 215 were still registered and eligible to vote in next month’s presidential primary election.

“It’s very troubling because it basically dilutes the voice of the lawful voter,” said Ellen Swensen with the “True the Vote,” a nationwide voter-rights group.

“What it does is every single vote that’s cast by a dead voter actually cancels out a vote of a lawful voter cause if they voted for one candidate and you voted let’s say for another, your vote got canceled out,” she said.

As Goldstein reports, it was all supposed to change after the hanging chads incident in Florida in the 2000 presidential election. Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002, which mandated sweeping reforms, including a statewide voter registration system that would eliminate ineligible voters.

But California is the only state that’s still not compliant with the act. Secretary of State Alex Padilla hopes to have it compliant later this year.

“You’re not supposed to have dead people on the rolls,” said J. Christian Adams, who is with the Public Interest Legal Foundation.

“The problem is California has been the most derelict state in the country in implementing statewide databases that are required under federal law. They just blew it off for over a decade,” said Adams.

And in that decade and more, CBS2 found hundreds of votes on the state’s own database cast for people who have died, like Cenkner.

“It’s very said that people can just take somebody’s name and go out and vote for them,” said Givans.

Los Angeles County supervisors are expected to call for a full investigation Tuesday as a result of this story.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/...ar-after-year/
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-01-2016, 03:32 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Socialism For The Uninformed

SOCIALISM FOR THE UNINFORMED
Why the destructive philosophy continues to attract followers.
By Thomas Sowell



http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2630...-thomas-sowell


Socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great. It is only when you go beyond rhetoric, and start looking at hard facts, that socialism turns out to be a big disappointment, if not a disaster.

While throngs of young people are cheering loudly for avowed socialist Bernie Sanders, socialism has turned oil-rich Venezuela into a place where there are shortages of everything from toilet paper to beer, where electricity keeps shutting down, and where there are long lines of people hoping to get food, people complaining that they cannot feed their families.

With national income going down, and prices going up under triple-digit inflation in Venezuela, these complaints are by no means frivolous. But it is doubtful if the young people cheering for Bernie Sanders have even heard of such things, whether in Venezuela or in other countries around the world that have turned their economies over to politicians and bureaucrats to run.

The anti-capitalist policies in Venezuela have worked so well that the number of companies in Venezuela is now a fraction of what it once was. That should certainly reduce capitalist "exploitation," shouldn't it?

But people who attribute income inequality to capitalists exploiting workers, as Karl Marx claimed, never seem to get around to testing that belief against facts — such as the fact that none of the Marxist regimes around the world has ever had as high a standard of living for working people as there is in many capitalist countries.

Facts are seldom allowed to contaminate the beautiful vision of the left. What matters to the true believers are the ringing slogans, endlessly repeated.

When Senator Sanders cries, "The system is rigged!" no one asks, "Just what specifically does that mean?" or "What facts do you have to back that up?"

In 2015, the 400 richest people in the world had net losses of $19 billion. If they had rigged the system, surely they could have rigged it better than that.

But the very idea of subjecting their pet notions to the test of hard facts will probably not even occur to those who are cheering for socialism and for other bright ideas of the political left.

How many of the people who are demanding an increase in the minimum wage have ever bothered to check what actually happens when higher minimum wages are imposed? More often they just assume what is assumed by like-minded peers — sometimes known as "everybody," with their assumptions being what "everybody knows."

Back in 1948, when inflation had rendered meaningless the minimum wage established a decade earlier, the unemployment rate among 16-17-year-old black males was under 10 percent. But after the minimum wage was raised repeatedly to keep up with inflation, the unemployment rate for black males that age was never under 30 percent for more than 20 consecutive years, from 1971 through 1994. In many of those years, the unemployment rate for black youngsters that age exceeded 40 percent and, for a couple of years, it exceeded 50 percent.

The damage is even greater than these statistics might suggest. Most low-wage jobs are entry-level jobs that young people move up out of, after acquiring work experience and a track record that makes them eligible for better jobs. But you can't move up the ladder if you don't get on the ladder.

The great promise of socialism is something for nothing. It is one of the signs of today's dumbed-down education that so many college students seem to think that the cost of their education should — and will — be paid by raising taxes on "the rich."

Here again, just a little check of the facts would reveal that higher tax rates on upper-income earners do not automatically translate into more tax revenue coming in to the government. Often high tax rates have led to less revenue than lower tax rates.

In a globalized economy, high tax rates may just lead investors to invest in other countries with lower tax rates. That means that jobs created by those investments will be overseas.

None of this is rocket science. But you do have to stop and think — and that is what too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach their students to do.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2630...-thomas-sowell
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-11-2016, 03:51 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Democratic National Committee Policy Shaper Has Her Say

I Really Don’t Personally Think Anyone Should Have a Gun’:
Democratic National Committee Policy Shaper Has Her Say
By Dave Urbanski



http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016...r-has-her-say/


Bonnie Schaefer, a philanthropist who’s part of the 15-member platform drafting committee of the Democratic National Committee, made her views about gun control quite clear this week, saying it’s not enough just to keep guns “out of the hands of mentally ill people and criminals.”


“I really don’t personally think anyone should have a gun,” Schaefer went on to say at Wednesday’s DNC planning event. “I mean, that’s just my own … philosophy. Nothing is ever solved when you have a gun in your hand, except the worst possible scenario.”

Joining Schaefer on the committee are chairman Elijah Cummings (the U.S. representative from Maryland), along with the likes of outspoken professor Cornel West, U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison and Center for American Progress executive director Neera Tanden.


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016...r-has-her-say/
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-23-2016, 07:15 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Default AR-15 Speaks!

AR-15 Speaks!
By AR-15 and Selwyn Duke


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...15_speaks.html


Hi, my name is AR-15. Some of you know me, but many more of you know of me -- through the media. But you may not know the real me.

I’m that cool, sleek-looking black gun you’ve seen profiled by the press. They put me in newspapers and on TV, showing my picture as if it’s a mug shot, even though I’ve never committed a crime. Oh, bad people have at times used (and abused) me to do bad things, but not really that often; as even The New York Times admitted (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/su...myth.html?_r=0) in 2014, firearms such as me -- which that paper and others call “assault weapons” -- are only used in two percent of gun crimes (most are perpetrated with handguns).

And that’s another thing. For a long time I didn’t mind the misnomer; it massaged my ego and made me feel like the big man on the block when I was called an “assault weapon.” But Mr. Duke convinced me that “pride goeth before a fall,” as the Good Book says. He pointed out that the term “assault weapon” was popularized by anti-gun zealot Josh Sugarmann, whose goal was to besmirch my reputation and get me banned. In fact, Sugarmann, not at all a sweet man, actually once said (http://www.quotes.net/quote/17826), “Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons -- anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun -- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”

And it’s true, especially in my case. The public knows my appearance well; people have seen my cousin and dead ringer, M-16, fired machine-gun style in war movies for decades. But, alas, I, AR-15 -- the weapon available to the public -- can only be fired semi-automatic. This means that every time you pull my trigger, one shot, and only one shot, is released.

So even if we accept the term “assault weapon,” that’s not me. To qualify, a gun must be capable of fully automatic fire (machine-gun style), and no such weapons are readily available to the public. So unlike cousin M-16, who originally had a select-fire feature allowing him to be shot in various ways, I’m just a one-trick pony.


Despite this, I’ve become a media whipping boy. Even when those rare crimes are committed in which a gun of my class is used, but which don’t involve me personally — such as the horrific Orlando incident, where Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen used a Sig Sauer MCX — my face is front and center. In fact, that’s what finally inspired me to speak out, articles such as this outrageous one from Daily News writer Gersh Kuntzman. Reporting on how he tried me at a Philly gun range, he actually wrote:

The recoil bruised my shoulder, which can happen if you don't know what you're doing. The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face. The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick. The explosions -- loud like a bomb -- gave me a temporary form of PTSD. For at least an hour after firing the gun just a few times, I was anxious and irritable.

None of the above is true; I know because I was there. Oh, in my younger and more impetuous days, I would’ve gotten a thrill out of being portrayed as such a macho guy. But the Truth will set you free (something the propagandizing Mr. Kuntzman should ponder).

And the truth is that I never bruised Mr. Kuntzman. One thing I can rightly puff up my chest over is that I have very little recoil because I’m high-tech -- my mechanism is designed to absorb much of the energy of the blast. And you don’t have to take my word for it. Mr. Duke had the opportunity years ago to fire me on multiple occasions, and he says that I have by far the least kick of any firearm he ever used. And if you don’t believe him, trust your own eyes. Below is a video of a seven-year-old girl trying me for the first time (forward to 2:55 if you want to see just the actual firing). See the video at bottom of post.

Did the little lass say “Ow!” or register discomfort in any way? Did she rub her shoulder? A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with buckshot could have knocked that little tyke on her kiester, but me? Also know that Kuntzman fired me only three times before bowing out, grousing that I was a “dangerous weapon.” And that fact, my friends, comes from Frank Stelmach, who was quoted by Kuntzman and who owns the gun range the journalist visited. You see, Mr. Duke actually called Stelmach (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews...r-15-interview), and one of the first things the man said to Duke -- as he complained of how Kuntzman misrepresented his words and the experience at the range -- was “It would be nice if journalists would write what you actually say!”

And by the by, Stelmach said that Kuntzman never mentioned anything about his shoulder or expressed that he was experiencing any kind of discomfort. Stelmach also called the notion that an ultra-low-recoil weapon such as me could bruise a grown man’s shoulder “nonsense.”

As for my “explosions” being “loud like a bomb,” well, I can belt out a song, but not like some other firearms. And no wonder. I fire the .223 cartridge, a small-caliber round the same diameter as a .22 (yes, .22s are those cute little rounds you put in your Marlin as a kid). Of course, my round is a lot more powerful than a .22 (in your face, Marlin!), but just take a look at these “killing power” rankings of rifle rounds (http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_killing_power_list.htm). It’s hard to admit, but my small .223 has the second least power of the 41 cartridges listed. In fact, when a lady friend of Mr. Duke’s tried me years ago, she remarked that, owing to my almost non-existent recoil, I was “like a toy.” It’s quite emasculating.

Of course, then there are my magazines; for the Kuntzmans of the world, no, those aren’t things you read that usually contain liberal propaganda. They’re objects loaded with cartridges that, assuming they’re removable, you then insert into firearms. It’s true that high-capacity magazines are available for me. But criminals would always get them on the black market; moreover, with just a bit of effort, any gun’s removable magazine can be modified to hold a large number of rounds. So why am I singled out?

The answer is simple: my looks -- and others’ prejudices. Take a gander at me below:


Am I not a sharp-looking guy? Black is beautiful!

But it’s also seen as “menacing,” especially by liberals in the media. Face it, since I’m functionally no different from other legal firearms -- semi-automatic just as most guns sold in America are -- I can only conclude that I’m profiled as dangerous because of my sleek military-like appearance and my color. If I looked like those much more powerful hunting rifles, would you really be troubling over me?

As Mr. Duke likes to put it, this is standard liberal style over substance. Never sparing my ego, he points out that assuming I’m a machine gun because I look like cousin M-16 is akin to putting a Porsche body on a Yugo chassis and expecting to go 0 to 60 in under 6 seconds. Of course, my self-image will survive, but being misunderstood, mischaracterized and discriminated against is a bit depressing.

It’s enough to make me want to shoot myself.

This piece was written by AR and edited by Selwyn Duke for grammar, punctuation and style


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...15_speaks.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 06-23-2016 at 07:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-24-2016, 05:53 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation The Democrats’ Mob Rule in the House of Representatives

THE DEMOCRATS’ MOB RULE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Using Saul Alinskly tactics to “occupy” the House for their gun control agenda.
By Joseph Klein



http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2632...s-joseph-klein

House Democrats made complete fools of themselves with their sit-in temper tantrum this week. Shouting their demands for an immediate vote on gun control legislation – apparently their only “serious” answer to global Islamic jihad – the Democratic disrupters caused pandemonium on the House floor on Wednesday. They sought to paralyze House proceedings with shouts of “No bill, No break!” Representative Maxine Waters of California proclaimed, “I’m prepared to stand here until hell freezes over.” Civil rights hero Representative John Lewis of Georgia declared, “we have to occupy the floor of the House until there’s action.”

The anarchist spirits of Occupy Wall Street and student campus occupations are alive and well in the House Democratic caucus. They shed their responsibilities by flagrantly violating the rules of the institution to which they were elected, intent on creating a media spectacle. They went so far as to use social media video tools to broadcast their sit-in, after the chamber’s official cameras had been turned off.

Even when the House Republican leadership called it a day and adjourned the House until after the 4th of July weekend, the Democrats pressed on with their occupation. Before that, as the real adult leader in the room, Speaker Paul Ryan had managed, despite the mayhem, to push through a major appropriations bill that included funding for combating the Zika virus. At least one of the House leaders was thinking of the welfare of the American people. It certainly was not the Democratic leader, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who even refused to leave the House floor temporarily when politely asked to do so by an officer so that the daily security sweep could be conducted.

In the midst of the Democrats’ theatrics, Representative Louis Gohmert (R-TX) introduced a note of sanity, shouting: “Radical Islam killed these people!” Gohmert is right. The Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, was a jihadist, who was committed to kill those he considered “infidels” one way or the other. The FBI had investigated him for possible ties to other jihadists and for terrorist threats he had made to co-workers, but let him slip through their net.

Moreover, Mateen would not have been stopped by the sort of legislation the Democrats are seeking, which is to use a prospective gun purchaser’s presence on a terror watch list as grounds to refuse his or her immediate purchase. Mateen had already been removed from a terrorist watch list prior to purchasing the guns he used in his killings.

However, facts are irrelevant to the Democrat disrupters. Taking a page right out of radical leftist Saul Alinsky’s playbook (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=2314), they set out, in Alinsky’s words “to agitate to the point of conflict.” They eschewed debating civilly their positions with logic and on the merits, because, as Alinsky had cautioned, to do so would be “a futile procedure.” Instead, they dutifully followed Alinsky’s Rule #13 from his Rules for Radicals: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

The shouting over Speaker Ryan’s attempt to restore order to the House proceedings was in perfect keeping with Alinsky’s counsel “to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.”

Attacking the “enemy” with “moral outrage” for supposedly failing to live up to the enemy’s “book of rules” is also one of Alinsky’s principal tactics. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) followed that tactic to a tee. He charged that the House “is drenched in blood and the only way we can cleanse it is if the speaker of the House allows us to vote on this legislation.” He added, “Every day that we don’t commit to a vote, the blood is on the leadership of this House.”

However, it will be Nadler who will have blood on his hands if any refugees admitted in the future from Syria or other countries beset by Islamic terrorism commit a violent crime in the United States. Nadler opposed H.R. 4038, the American Security Against Foreign Enemies (SAFE) Act of 2015, which would have required additional certification procedures to ensure full vetting of Iraqi and Syrian refugees seeking to enter the United States. He claimed, without any hard evidence, that “the Syrian refugees are running away from ISIS.” He signed a letter to President Obama last year urging the administration to admit as many as 100,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2016 – ten times the administration’s own irresponsible target.

The problem is we do not know who the purported refugees really are. CIA director John Brennan said on June 16th that ISIS “is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including in refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel.”

“I don’t, obviously, put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees, so that’s a huge concern of ours,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said last September, using another name for ISIS or the Islamic State.

FBI Director James Comey admitted that screening of Iraqi refugees had been less than adequate and that vetting Syrian refugees would be even more difficult. “If we don’t know much about somebody, there won’t be anything in our data,” he said. “I can’t sit here and offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this.”

Even children may be of concern. In early June, for example, three young Syrian refugees, aged 8, 10 and 13, reportedly raped a 13 year old girl at knifepoint.

The FBI is already strapped for resources in monitoring potential jihadist terrorists currently residing in the United States. That is one reason, along with obeisance to political correctness, that so many would-be jihadists have slipped through the cracks before going on to commit their murderous acts of terror. Greatly expanding the number of new Syrian refugees admitted to this country, as Nadler and other Democrats have proposed, will divert scarce resources to vetting those refugees in the virtually impossible task of keeping out even more would-be jihadists.

The Democrats’ solution – more gun control – is snake oil to distract the American public from the dangerous policies they are advocating in opening up our borders to many thousands of refugees from Syria and other parts of the Middle East and North Africa.

Moreover, the Democrats’ hypocrisy on the gun control issue itself is appalling. For example, the number of people shot and killed in the Democratic Party-run city of Chicago during 2016 to date is 281. There were 1558 people shot and wounded. In June so far, 50 people have been shot and killed in Chicago. 260 have been shot and wounded. Where is the Democrats’ outrage over the slaughter of kids on Chicago’s streets, despite Chicago’s tough gun control laws? They are using the Orlando killings to grandstand for simplistic remedies, rather than deal with the underlying causes of gun violence.

The Democrats should stop following Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and engaging in mob rule. They are members of the House of Representatives, which has rules of decorum intended to allow the peoples’ business to be performed in a reasoned manner. If they cannot behave themselves, they should at minimum be censured for gross misconduct.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2632...s-joseph-klein
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 06-24-2016 at 05:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 06-25-2016, 09:17 AM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation How Progressives View Constitutional Rights

How Progressives View Constitutional Rights

“The Founders’ Constitution and the Challenge of Progressivism”
By Larry P. Arnn • President, Hillsdale College




Eugenics: Progressivism’s Ultimate Social Engineering- https://fee.org/articles/eugenics-pr...l-engineering/

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

  #52  
Old 06-27-2016, 05:24 AM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Senate Democrats vote to allow Democrat cities to break federal law

Senate Democrats vote to allow Democrat cities to break federal law


http://conservatives4palin.com/2015/...deral-law.html

James Arkin, Real Clear Politics:

The Senate failed to clear a procedural hurdle Tuesday on legislation that would have limited federal money awarded to so-called “sanctuary cities,” local jurisdictions that refuse to comply with aspects of federal immigration laws.

The vast majority of Democrats filibustered the measure, which fell six votes short of the number needed to end debate on the bill, 54-45. Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk was the only Republican to vote against the measure, while Indiana’s Joe Donnelly and West Virginia’s Joe Manchin were the two Democrats voting in favor.

http://conservatives4palin.com/2015/...deral-law.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 06-28-2016, 04:01 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation House Sit-in: Dems Jump the Shark

House Sit-in: Dems Jump the Shark
The left forgets that two can play at street violence.
By Christopher Chantrill


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...the_shark.html


In a way, I feel sorry for our Democratic friends. As Rush Limbaugh has been saying for 20 years, they are playing out of a 30-year-old playbook, just running the same old plays because that’s what Ted Kennedy did.

But conducting a sit-in on the floor of the House of Representatives on gun control while protected by the guns of the Capitol Hill police goes beyond doing one more for the Gipper. It shows that the modern Democratic Party and its liberal movement have completely forgotten the point of representative government. It removes the need for sit-ins and street politics.

The sit-in, the peaceful protest, the march are all part of the left’s culture of revolution that started in 1848 in the depths of the first great capitalist depression featuring barricades and insurrection all over Europe. For the left, ever since, it is always 1848 and time to hit the streets.

Earth to liberals. There is a big difference between 1848 and today. Back then the working class didn’t have the vote. As it surged into the cities to work indoors, the only way that the working class could alert the political system to its grievances was by street action. There was nobody representing their interests in the councils of power.

The bourgeoisie and the landed ruling class put down the 1848 revolutions, but they realized they had a problem, so within a decade or two, they gave the working class the vote, and that stopped the rioting in the streets.

Fast forward to India and the Indian National Movement. Living in colonial India, but educated in Britain, Mohandas Gandhi developed the idea of nonviolent protest into a potent weapon against the Brits.

Of course, the idea of nonviolent protest has always been an oxymoron. A public demonstration or peaceful protest is always a show of force; it is telling the ruling class that here is a problem that won’t go away.

In India, the Brits took the hint and gave India its independence.

Fast forward to the Sixties and the U.S. civil rights movement. Civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King, having learned the lessons of the Indian National Movement, brilliantly copied Gandhi’s nonviolent tactics, so that every violent reaction of the authorities became a scandal. The nonviolent protests were appropriate because blacks in the South were disenfranchised; they didn’t have a voice in the councils of power.

But sit-ins by representatives in the House of Representatives? Give me a break. The whole point of a legislature is to stop playing like Prince Hal and Harry Hotspur and resolve problems peacefully. If you don’t like the result, then you should redouble your efforts to win the next election. If you resort to street action under universal suffrage you are saying you believe in democracy only when your side wins.

Since 1848 the left has done an amazing job of legitimizing street action by their side as the desperate struggle of the dispossessed, and anyone else as a racist sexist fascist. But at least since the Sixties most “peaceful protesters” have been the agents of the ruling class, funded by lefty billionaires and sponsored by liberal foundations.

In her Bourgeois Equality Deirdre McCloskey asks why the intelligentsia turned, in 1848, against freedom and capitalism. I think the answer is pretty simple. The Educated Youth of 1848 were shocked and appalled by the misery of the 1846-47 depression (caused by the end of the railway boom in England) and determined to do something about it. Being young and foolish, they opted for riot and revolution.

For these young men the heady experience of 1848 was transcendental. Ever since, the left has longed for a return to 1848 when young men manned the barricades and rose up against their fathers -- and had a grand old time. Ever since, they have always lusted for an occasion where street protest was required. For them, it is always 1848.

Only it isn’t 1848. The disenfranchised workers of 1848 earned, say, $5 per day. Now the enfranchised workers earn $100 per day, and they are protected from the age-old vicissitudes of life by the welfare state. There is no warrant for taking to the streets, unless you are an illegal immigrant.

The left forgets that two can play at street violence. There are those outside the system, the dispossessed outside the castle gates. Then there are the bully boys of the ruling class. In an age when every well-born Educated Youth is forced to pass a boot camp in lefty activism to get that college degree, I’d say that liberals better think deeply about their bully-boy activism culture, before it is too late.

When the ruling class stages a sit-in in the House of Representatives it is an insult to the American people. Call off your bully boys, you regime thugs.

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...the_shark.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 06-28-2016, 04:03 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation House Sit-in: Dems Jump the Shark

House Sit-in: Dems Jump the Shark
The left forgets that two can play at street violence.
By Christopher Chantrill


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...the_shark.html


In a way, I feel sorry for our Democratic friends. As Rush Limbaugh has been saying for 20 years, they are playing out of a 30-year-old playbook, just running the same old plays because that’s what Ted Kennedy did.

But conducting a sit-in (http://www.wired.com/2016/06/house-s...e-made-happen/) on the floor of the House of Representatives on gun control while protected by the guns of the Capitol Hill police goes beyond doing one more for the Gipper. It shows that the modern Democratic Party and its liberal movement have completely forgotten the point of representative government. It removes the need for sit-ins and street politics.

The sit-in, the peaceful protest, the march are all part of the left’s culture of revolution that started in 1848 in the depths of the first great capitalist depression (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1847) featuring barricades and insurrection all over Europe. For the left, ever since, it is always 1848 and time to hit the streets.

Earth to liberals. There is a big difference between 1848 and today. Back then the working class didn’t have the vote. As it surged into the cities to work indoors, the only way that the working class could alert the political system to its grievances was by street action. There was nobody representing their interests in the councils of power.

The bourgeoisie and the landed ruling class put down the 1848 revolutions, but they realized they had a problem, so within a decade or two, they gave the working class the vote, and that stopped the rioting in the streets.

Fast forward to India and the Indian National Movement. Living in colonial India, but educated in Britain, Mohandas Gandhi developed the idea of nonviolent protest into a potent weapon against the Brits.

Of course, the idea of nonviolent protest has always been an oxymoron. A public demonstration or peaceful protest is always a show of force; it is telling the ruling class that here is a problem that won’t go away.

In India, the Brits took the hint and gave India its independence.

Fast forward to the Sixties and the U.S. civil rights movement. Civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King, having learned the lessons of the Indian National Movement, brilliantly copied Gandhi’s nonviolent tactics, so that every violent reaction of the authorities became a scandal. The nonviolent protests were appropriate because blacks in the South were disenfranchised; they didn’t have a voice in the councils of power.

But sit-ins by representatives in the House of Representatives? Give me a break. The whole point of a legislature is to stop playing like Prince Hal and Harry Hotspur and resolve problems peacefully. If you don’t like the result, then you should redouble your efforts to win the next election. If you resort to street action under universal suffrage you are saying you believe in democracy only when your side wins.

Since 1848 the left has done an amazing job of legitimizing street action by their side as the desperate struggle of the dispossessed, and anyone else as a racist sexist fascist. But at least since the Sixties most “peaceful protesters” have been the agents of the ruling class, funded by lefty billionaires and sponsored by liberal foundations.

In her Bourgeois Equality Deirdre McCloskey asks why the intelligentsia turned, in 1848, against freedom and capitalism. I think the answer is pretty simple. The Educated Youth of 1848 were shocked and appalled by the misery of the 1846-47 depression (caused by the end of the railway boom in England) and determined to do something about it. Being young and foolish, they opted for riot and revolution.

For these young men the heady experience of 1848 was transcendental. Ever since, the left has longed for a return to 1848 when young men manned the barricades and rose up against their fathers -- and had a grand old time. Ever since, they have always lusted for an occasion where street protest was required. For them, it is always 1848.

Only it isn’t 1848. The disenfranchised workers of 1848 earned, say, $5 per day. Now the enfranchised workers earn $100 per day, and they are protected from the age-old vicissitudes of life by the welfare state. There is no warrant for taking to the streets, unless you are an illegal immigrant.

The left forgets that two can play at street violence. There are those outside the system, the dispossessed outside the castle gates. Then there are the bully boys of the ruling class. In an age when every well-born Educated Youth is forced to pass a boot camp in lefty activism to get that college degree, I’d say that liberals better think deeply about their bully-boy activism culture, before it is too late.

When the ruling class stages a sit-in in the House of Representatives it is an insult to the American people. Call off your bully boys, you regime thugs.

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...the_shark.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 06-28-2016 at 04:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-06-2016, 04:01 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Angry The Secret Negotiations between Carter and Khomeini

The Secret Negotiations between Carter and Khomeini
Jimmy Carter was the midwife of the 20th-century Islamist revolution.
By Manda Zand Ervin


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic..._khomeini.html


The reporters of the BBC Persian language have been exposing the history of a conspiracy between Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic tyranny in Iran, and President Jimmy Carter, during the 1978-1979 so-called “revolution”. The CIA documents show how the two men negotiated on terms of agreements for replacing the progressive, secular Shah with the fanatic Islamist Khomeini.

We now know that Khomeini had written a letter to President John F. Kennedy on November 6th of 1963, asking to be considered for establishing an Islamic rule in Iran. According to the documents; Khomeini had promised that he will not oppose American interests in Iran. President Kennedy was assassinated two weeks later and Khomeini was left without response from America.

Khomeini continued his ever louder opposition to the Shah on every progressive action that he took. The documents in the Carter library report that Khomeini was not one of the important members of opposition, though he was the loudest.

Surprisingly, President Carter chose the loudest Islamist, not one of the important secular persons who would have continued the economic progress and modernization taking root in Iran.

The big misrepresentation of American policy has been that U.S. supported the Shah. However, the facts of history prove that U.S. had always supported and helped Iran to become a sovereign nation after over 100 years of Turkish rulers and Shia clerics, maintained by British and Russian colonialist domination; that kept Iranians poor and illiterate.

Despite the fact that former President Carter and his advisors have always denied his betrayal of a strategically important friend, CIA records of the meetings, the policy memos, and the diplomatic messages between the White House and Khomeini’s representatives, in a French coffee shop, prove otherwise.

According to these records; Khomeini’s attitude has been collaborative. In his secret message of Jan 27th of 1979 he proposed this deal to President Carter: “Iranian military leaders will listen to you, he said, but the Iranian people follow my orders.” You prevent the military from any coup against my takeover and I will restore stability back to the country, ending the unrest.” Khomeini also promised that: “America's interests and citizens in Iran would be protected.”

According to the BBC reports of the CIA documents (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36431160), in a personal message to the American president, Ayatollah Khomeini says: "You will see we are not in any particular animosity with the Americans." Pledging his Islamic Republic will be; "a humanitarian one, which will benefit the cause of peace and tranquility for all mankind".

The men involved in the establishment of Islamic regime in Iran were: William Sullivan, the U.S. ambassador to Iran, Cyrus Vance, U.S. Secretary of State, Warren Zimmermann, a political counsellor with the U.S. embassy in France, used as a messenger for the U.S. to Khomeini, and Robert E Huyser, a U.S. Air Force general sent by President Carter on a secretive mission to Tehran in January 1979 to carry out Khomeini’s demand of neutralizing the Iranian military opposition, preventing any coup against Khomeini’s Islamic regime.

Meanwhile in Tehran, the U.S. ambassador, William Sullivan met with a secret Islamic Revolutionary Council on January 24th. Among them was Ayatollah Mousavi Ardebili -- the future Chief Justice of Khomeini’s Islamic Republic, who became the executioner of tens of thousands of political opponents. However, Mr. Sullivan’s favorable report on him was: “the cleric seemed “reasonable”. He was a more forceful type, but "no fanatic".

According to the reports, President Carter agreed not only remove the leadership, even change the constitution of Iran. It is astonishing that a president of the United States who should believe in separation of religion and state, would install a fanatic religious cleric with a history of opposition to women’s equal rights and social and economic freedoms, to take over a secular country that was in process of becoming a progressive democracy.

This unforgivable mistake in foreign policy by an American president is when he follows an ideological view, by ignoring the big picture. The noisy .08% of the population who were paid $15 a person by the Mosque to march, should not be called popular revolution. The 34 million silent majority who were pro their 1906 Constitutional Revolution’s goal for Modernity and sovereignty in their homeland should have been respected.

According to the polls, President Carter was opposed by over 50% of Americans at that time. Yet he found the .08% marching opposition in Iran supportable?!

Thirty years later, president Obama embarked on another deal with the same deceitful Islamic tyrants to continue their international terrorism and promotion of their political Islamic ideology. This time negotiations were facilitated by Sultan Qaboos bin Said of Oman, who had a friendly relationship with Khamenei. Beginning in 2009, before the uprising of the Iranian people against the regime, until 2011- 2013, the negotiations continued (http://backchannel.al-monitor.com/in...n-backchannel/) and the “election” of Hasan Rohani was planned.

The meetings between the representatives of the U.S. Department of State and Khamenei’s representatives were held in the city of Masqat, where President Obama guaranteed that there will be no “regime change” policy on Iran. Furthermore they agreed to remove the sanctions and pay Khamenei the frozen assets of over $100 billion in exchange for Khamenei to reducing their yellow cake production of nuclear bomb, without any signature or guarantee.

President Jimmy Carter handed Iran over to a 7th-century tyrant without researching his background, and learned a lesson that any Iranian would have told them, had they asked. “Do not trust any Islamic cleric.”

Thirty years later, President Obama empowers them, aware of their established deception, paying them Billions of dollars by staging an elaborate scheme, to fool America.

Who will be responsible when IRGC tests their first nuclear bomb?

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic..._khomeini.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 07-06-2016 at 04:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-09-2016, 01:57 AM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Wake Up America: A Review

Wake Up America: A Review
The common theme in Eric Bolling’s book is the need to wake up,
to push back against liberal culture by returning to the values America was founded on.
By Elise Cooper


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic..._a_review.html


Wake Up America should be the rallying cry for everyone who wants the United States to be great again, considering it has gone adrift over the last seven years from what the Founding Fathers intended. It is also the name of "The Five" co-host Eric Bolling’s book. After interviewing him American Thinker decided to take points he made and compare it to world events.

The qualities Bolling writes about are grit, manliness, individualism, merit, profit and providence, dominion over our environment, thrift, and above all pride in our country. Bolling speaks of his background, raised in a struggling blue-collar family in Chicago, where he learned from his parents that hard work and firm values will enable someone to get ahead in life. Those values drove him as a young baseball player to being drafted by the Pittsburgh Pirates, then success as a New York Mercantile Exchange trader, and now his daily role on Fox News Channel.

The book begins with a dedication to President Obama, “If it weren’t for your announced goal of ‘fundamentally transforming the United States of America,’ I wouldn’t have been to exceedingly motivated to write this book to stop you and your liberal pals from achieving that goal. America will survive your agenda.”

He explained, “I did the dedication because this upcoming election is extremely important. It is the last shot we have for at least eight years, maybe longer. We need to push back against President Obama’s stated goal of not making America exceptional on the world stage. The President has done everything in his power to achieve the goal of undermining American exceptionalism.”

An example is President Obama’s executive order that makes the central point of U.S. policy the limiting of civilian casualties in war zones. He spoke of having between 64 and 116 civilian casualties occurring in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. No one wants any civilians to be hurt or killed, but this president appears to put those in war zones ahead of other civilians. Just look at the numbers of innocents killed outise of any "war zone": 129 in Paris, 32 in Brussels, 14 in San Bernardino, 49 in Orlando, 41 in Istanbul, and 20 in Bangladesh. Bolling is correct that Americans need to wake up and elect a president who is willing to destroy the terrorist threat, no matter the consequences, because in the end more of those in war zones will also be saved. In its own military campaigns, America often saves the few only to watch the many die horrific deaths at the hands of the Jihadists.

How many people have been frustrated with political correctness? Bolling shows his exasperation calling it “defeatist crap… a huge number of Americans think trying to make everyone equal is the right thing to do. For example, a school board's decision in North Carolina to stop naming valedictorians over the ‘unhealthy competition’ is an example of liberalism run amok. What they are saying, ‘it is not ok to work hard and succeed.’ It is a ‘everyone gets a trophy culture.’ We need to emphasize winning, being in first place or the Asian countries like China will eat us for lunch. The top ten countries in math, science, and reading are the Asian countries. We're becoming a nation of wussies. Let's stop America's slide into the liberal abyss. People are fed up with political correctness and are tired of being told what to say, how to say it, and who to say it to.”

The perfect example of this is Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s recent remarks in Orlando, “Our most effective response to terror and to hatred is compassion, its unity, and its love.” So the response should be to offer a big hug? No wonder retired FBI agents complain about the restrictions imposed on their ability to conduct investigations. American Thinker was told by a retired FBI Agent, "given the current philosophy of the administration, they do not want Muslims investigated unless there is clear information or evidence indicative of criminal activity. Therefore, in evaluating these cases, the FBI is likely going to be very conservative in their approach.”

In the “Grit” chapter he wrote, “There are a few major exceptions to today’s ‘softness indoctrination.’ The biggest and by far most important is the U.S. military. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are among the toughest, grittiest folks to ever walk the planet.” Bolling circles back to the Obama dedication as he blames this administration for “questioning the actions of our forces, which has allowed us to go from a winning strategy to a losing one.”

America seems to only fight limited wars. U.S. forces play by the rules while its enemies exploit those same rules to limit freedom of action, create sanctuaries where they can rest and rearm, and then launch international propaganda campaigns. These unnecessary restrictions are imposed on the use of military force. Veterans have complained to American Thinker how they knew where the enemy was, but couldn’t pursue them or even kill them.

In the “Profit” chapter there is the implication that words such as profit and successful are dirty words to the Liberals. But isn’t it more than that, it is also the hypocrisy? Hillary Clinton speaks of her gender; yet is relying on her two male bookends, President Obama and Bill Clinton. She also speaks of income inequality, but has made a fortune since being First Lady. Bolling thinks “being a hypocrite is synonymous with being a liberal. Hillary talks of income inequality, but gets hundreds of thousands of dollars to speak at a college. If she cares for college students’ welfare give the speeches for free. And she speaks of being the first female president at the same time she says her husband will run the economy.”

Hillary Clinton tries to hide her wealth. Yet, the press is complacent with her, but in 2012 constantly asked how he could connect with the American people because of his portfolio. Unlike Donald Trump, Romney did play right into the liberals’ hands by not embracing it, but apologizing for his success, which contributed to another term of President Obama.

Also, in that chapter Bolling speaks of how a hike in the minimum wage would cost jobs. He told American Thinker, “Putting the wages too high will make the decision easy for an employer to transition to automation. People will find alternatives if the wages are too high. The left does not seem to get this. Automation is much more profitable and efficient to a company than hiring someone who has to be given health care or a higher salary. This will drive unemployment.”

The common theme in Bolling’s book is the need to wake up, to push back against liberal culture by returning to the values that America was founded on. People need to stop having Democrats pull the wool over their eyes.

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic..._a_review.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 07-09-2016 at 02:00 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-09-2016, 02:34 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Dem Congresswoman Indicted After Investigation Reveals Corruption

Dem Congresswoman Indicted After Investigation Reveals She Allegedly Used Charity as ‘Personal Slush Fund’
"Corruption erodes the public’s trust in our entire system of representative government"
By Jon Street


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016...ther-offenses/


Editor’s Note:
Story by the Associated Press; curated by Jon Street.

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) — U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown of Florida and her chief of staff pleaded not guilty Friday to multiple fraud charges and other federal offenses in a grand jury indictment unsealed after an investigation into what prosecutors call a phony charity turned into a personal slush fund.

Brown, a 69-year-old Democrat, and Chief of Staff Elias “Ronnie” Simmons, 50, entered pleas in Jacksonville federal court on charges of mail and wire fraud, conspiracy, obstruction and filing of false tax returns.

She has represented a Jacksonville-based congressional district since 1993 — one of the first three African-Americans elected to Congress from Florida since Reconstruction— and is seeking re-election in a newly redrawn district.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) rally with fellow members of Congress on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court February 27, 2013 in Washington, DC. Leaders from Congress joined civil rights icons to rally as the court prepared to hear oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder, a legal challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)


The 24-count indictment comes after an investigation into the purported charity One Door for Education Foundation Inc., which federal prosecutors say was billed as a way to give scholarships to poor students but instead filled the coffers of Brown and her associates.

After the hearing, Brown predicted she would be cleared at trial. She was surrounded by supporters outside the courthouse, some carrying signs. One read, “Justice or else. Corrine matters.”

“My heart is just really heavy. But I’m looking forward to a speedy day in court to vindicate myself,” Brown said. “We will present the other side.”

Brown and Simmons, of Laurel, Maryland, were both released on $50,000 bail and ordered not to travel outside the U.S. A status hearing was set for July 26. Simmons, who has been Brown’s chief of staff since 1993, declined comment after the hearing.

Earlier this year, One Door President Carla Wiley pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud after it was determined that she had deposited $800,000 into the foundation’s account over four years. Over that time, federal prosecutors say it gave one scholarship for $1,000 and $200 to an unidentified person in Florida, while Wiley transferred herself tens of thousands of dollars.

“Congresswoman Brown and her chief of staff are alleged to have used the congresswoman’s official position to solicit over $800,000 in donations to a supposed charitable organization, only to use that organization as a personal slush fund,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, chief of the Justice Department’s criminal division, said in a statement.

“Corruption erodes the public’s trust in our entire system of representative government,” Caldwell added.

The indictment says that Brown, Simmons and Wiley “used the vast majority” of One Door donations for their personal and professional benefit, including tens of thousands of dollars in cash deposits that Simmons made to Brown’s personal bank accounts.

According to the indictment, more than $200,000 in One Door funds were used to pay for events hosted by Brown or held in her honor, including a golf tournament, lavish receptions during an annual Washington conference and the use of luxury boxes for a Beyonce concert and an NFL game between the Washington Redskins and Jacksonville Jaguars.

Corrine Brown Indictment (https://www.scribd.com/document/3177...ent#from_embed) by Mike Kaye (https://www.scribd.com/user/28809568...aye#from_embed) on Scribd



One Door money was also used for such things are repairs to Brown’s car and vacations to locations such as the Bahamas, Miami Beach and Los Angeles. In addition, House of Representatives money was used to pay a “close family member” of Simmons identified as “Person C” more than $735,000 between 2001 and 2016 for a job in Brown’s office that involved little or no work, according to the indictment. Simmons allegedly benefited from some of that money.

“Our office is committed to ferreting out and prosecuting all forms of corruption and fraud, regardless of who the offender is,” said U.S. Attorney A. Lee Bentley. “In our nation, no one is above the law.”

Documents previously obtained by The Associated Press from Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer’s office show that he received an invitation bearing the seal of the House of Representatives to a July 13, 2013 golf tournament called the “Corrine Brown Invitational.” It was sponsored by the One Door organization and coincided with a freight and rail industry symposium in Jacksonville.

Potential donors attending the tournament received letters from One Door with Brown’s signature and official House seal asking them to give from $125 up to $20,000 to One Door, according to Wiley’s plea agreement.

The invitation said the donations would benefit a scholarship fund for the Jacksonville chapter of the Conference of Minority Transportation Officials, or COMTO, and other charities. Authorities say none of the charities received any of the money raised.

View Video Here>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016...ther-offenses/
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 07-09-2016 at 02:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-13-2016, 07:32 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Lightbulb Guccifer 2.0 releases new DNC docs

Guccifer 2.0 Releases New DNC Docs
By Joe Uchill



http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecur...s-new-dnc-docs


Guccifer 2.0, the hacker who breached the Democratic National Committee, has released a cache of purported DNC documents to The Hill in an effort to refocus attention on the hack.

The documents include more than 11,000 names matched with some identifying information, files related to two controversial donors and a research file on Sarah Palin.

“The press [is] gradually forget[ing] about me, [W]ikileaks is playing for time and [i] have some more docs,” he said in electronic chat explaining his rationale.

The documents provide some insight into how the DNC handled high-profile donation scandals. But the choice of documents revealed to The Hill also provides insight into the enigmatic Guccifer 2.0.

The hacker provided a series of spreadsheets related to Norman Hsu, a Democratic donor jailed in 2009 for running a Ponzi scheme and arranging illegal campaign contributions. The DNC responded by assembling files to gauge the exposure from Hsu to its slate of candidates.

Similar files on Paul J. Magliocchetti, a lobbyist closely associated with former Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), provide a quick reference document outlining Magliocchetti’s donations to Republicans. Magliocchetti pleaded guilty in 2010 to involvement in a pay-for-play campaign finance scheme.

Guccifer 2.0 has claimed to be a Romanian hacker with no strong political leanings. Guccifer 2.0’s choice to release documents from Magliocchetti and Hsu, whose cases are now six and seven years old, shows a detailed knowledge of American politics seemingly at odds with the backstory provided by the hacker.

Experts have questioned whether Guccifer 2.0 is Romanian or even a single person. Tools used in the attack were matched to Russian intelligence agencies and, when tested, Guccifer 2.0 has struggled to speak in Romanian.

A popular theory explaining the attack is that the DNC hack is a Russian attempt to embarrass the DNC and influence the election. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has speculated that the hack was actually a false flag operation performed by the DNC to cast aspersions on his campaign.

Guccifer 2.0 was an unknown quantity until after the DNC announced it had been breached. He has since leaked a variety of documents, including counter-Trump strategies and donor databases.

The Guccifer 2.0 name, the hacker has said, is an homage to Marcel Lazăr Lehel, who called himself Guccifer. Lehel broke into the email accounts of former President George W. Bush’s aides and family, Clinton family confidant Sidney Blumenthal and "Sex in the City" author Candace Bushnell. Lehel, now imprisoned, recently claimed he had also hacked Hillary Clinton’s private email server. FBI Director James Comey later testified before Congress that Lehel later admitted he lied when he said he hacked the former secretary of State's server.

The files provided by Guccifer 2.0 to The Hill includes a folder with a list of objectionable quotes from Palin and an archive of the former Alaska governor’s Twitter account assembled in 2011 — before Palin decided against running for president.

Other documents contain internal fundraising goals for different donors and bundlers in 2005 and a 10,000-name email database that, based on the prevalence of Hotmail accounts and lack of Gmail references, appears to be from around the same time. Separate files contain as many as 1,500 names pared with contact information from 2005 and 2006 fundraising events.

“Our experts are confident in their assessment that the Russian government hackers were the actors responsible for the breach detected in April, and we believe that the subsequent release and the claims around it may be a part of a disinformation campaign by the Russians,” a senior DNC official said in a written statement.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecur...s-new-dnc-docs
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 07-13-2016 at 07:35 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 07-14-2016, 02:25 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Arrow Democrats’ Lives Matter...Most

Democrats’ Lives Matter...Most
What Democrats are inflicting on poor blacks today is another chapter in the ongoing story of their injustice toward blacks.
By J. Robert Smith


http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...ter__most.html


Note that in the wake of the Dallas police slaughter, Democrats have been a smidgen less vocal in exploiting the tragedy. Yes, a boob like John Conyers called for gun control (http://www.freep.com/story/news/2016...ucus/86860794/). Hillary condescended to whites (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/hillary-w...ice-shootings/) by proclaiming that white folk need to hear blacks’ “legitimate cries.” The fact is that it’s Democrats who are and long have been… “hearing impaired.” Hillary isn’t about to shame her own party for its historic and current blacksploitation. Introspection has never been in the mix for Democrats.

As for Dallas, it’s one thing for Democrats to game the race issue and use blacks; it’s quite another when the dots are connected, chillingly. To wit, that Micah Johnson not only shot cops but white ones, and had expressed a desire to kill whites, period.

A lot of Democrats (http://www.gallup.com/poll/160373/de...tly-white.aspx) are white. Larger concentrations of them are in cities, mostly in white-dominant precincts. That’s certainly true for affluent white Democrats. Underclass blacks are concentrated in urban areas, too. Flashpoints for black unrest are in cities, where crime and all sorts of dysfunction fester. Uptown and the hood are in close proximity.

The next Micah Johnson might not be so -- discriminating -- about the whites he kills. They may not be wearing badges. Why, the next angry black guy might find those pricey white enclaves -- conveniently located near hoods in Chicago or New York -- as target-rich environments. Does anyone suppose that another killer will check credentials before shooting whites? You know, “Do you vote Democratic? Do you hear my legitimate cries?”

To better connect the dots, post-Dallas, white Democrats are waking to the realization that Micah Johnson-like Terminators aren’t going to cull Democrats from Republicans before opening fire. The upscale, lilywhite, thirty-something Yale-trained attorney and his wife who bumper-stickered for Bern and think de Blasio is swell are as much targets to be mowed down crossing the street in New York’s Upper West Side as are Knuckle-dragging Republicans. Hate being primal, one dead white is as good as another.

None of this is to suggest that Democrats will cease and desist fueling black underclass resentment. Nor will they quit underwriting the black grievance industry. They’ll simply be less heavy-handed; they’ll rely more on cunning and code.

Democrats can’t afford Americans seeing them as in any way -- even tangentially -- instigating mayhem and mass killings. And, sooner or later, majority whites (let’s add Hispanics and Asians) will connect the dots and tire of being at the wrong end of long guns. Consequences have consequences, and it can all get awfully ugly.

The ugly truth is that Democrats will keep finding ways of stoking black resentment and separateness because they need blacks to vote virtually en bloc. Black dependency on the Party of Government (on government itself) is critical to Democrats’ fortunes. It’s about political power and everything that flows from it. Poor, dysfunctional black communities controlled by major and minor race hustlers, like the notorious Al Sharpton, deliver votes that keep more than a few cities Democratic; control county commission, state legislative, and congressional seats; swing governorships to Democrats; and of overriding importance, push states’ presidential electoral votes into the Democratic column.

Uglier still is that since Andy Jackson, the Democratic Party has enabled black oppression when not outright exploiting blacks. Slavery was the domain of Democrats. A bloody civil war was fought over slavery. The KKK and Jim Crow are registered Democratic. “Progressive” Democrats -- Wilson and FDR, famously -- weren’t about to alienate their white supremacist wing in the name of Negro civil rights. Wilson was a bona fide racist.

In Stalinist fashion, and with the collusion of the academy and mainstream media, modern Democrats are erasing the party’s history and rewriting it. Proto-Democrat Thomas Jefferson (slaveholder) and the aforementioned Democratic Party founder and slaveholder General Jackson are being winnowed out of Democratic narratives. Down a memory hole go those titans. Wilson is fashioned as a trailblazing progressive. FDR has been “blackwashed” to make him glow.

The modern Democratic narrative is not only false but flagrantly, perversely so. Oppression of blacks masquerades as compassion. Helping governments -- local, state, and national -- actually hurt underclass blacks. Welfare destroys incentives to work and, starting decades ago, contributed strongly to the breakdown of poor black families and communities. Inner-city schools are sops to teachers’ unions and fail to teach. Abortion mills, often aided and abetted by government largesse, take more black lives annually than a legion of bad cops could.

The states are laboratories for democracy, huh? The cities are definitely laboratories for Democratic policies, manifestly ruinous toward poor blacks (toward the poor inclusively). But nasty realties can’t be permitted to interfere with Democrats’ fortunes.

The unwillingness of Democrats to acknowledge this failure isn’t a matter of self-delusion -- do-gooders unable to come to grips with their do-goodness bombing. Terrible Democratic policies persist because of cynicism that borders on crosses over into venality. Democrats’ oversight of the compassionate destruction of underclass black communities advances with a gruesome single-mindedness. Ably assisting are the party’s urban black major domos. Too many elected blacks aren’t about liberating their people, but about lining their own pockets (http://www.citymayors.com/politics/u...pt-mayors.html).

What Democrats are inflicting on poor blacks today is another chapter in the ongoing story of their injustice toward blacks. The grossest and saddest twist -- in respects, the most satisfying to Democrats -- is that a militant group like Black Lives Matter calls for revving up the very same statist policies that’s waylaid their people since the 1960s. BLM’s call is something Democrats will gladly heed. Plundering taxpayers and fortifying the state is always a keen play for them. But more “gimmie” isn’t going to solve a single problem facing underclass blacks.

Since LBJ, Democrats’ antipoverty schemes lay in tatters in one after another poor black community. Of course, Democrats don’t want to be exposed as crass political operators.

But for Democrats, failure means not repentance but the need for artfulness. So they strive mightily to divert responsibility for their failed policies and underlying political agenda by blaming white America for poor black America’s troubles. That may stink of Alinsky but blaming another and covering up motives dates back to the Garden of Eden. At least Adam and Eve could claim no precedent to have learned from. What’s Barack’s and Hillary’s excuse?

Alas, for vile Democrats, truth has its own stubborn life. In this Age of Conceit, Democrats believe they can dominate the dialogue so as to bury the truth of the great injuries they inflict on blacks daily -- inflict for crude temporal gain.

But the truth will win out -- eventually; not easily, of course. Convulsions there will be. But when the shades are finally lifted from blacks’ eyes, woe not unto white America; woe unto self-serving and manipulative Democrats, those historic nemeses of black America. Woe unto them (http://biblehub.com/matthew/18-7.htm).

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...ter__most.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 07-14-2016 at 02:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-14-2016, 03:40 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation The curse of violent crime in democrat-run cities

THE CURSE OF VIOLENT CRIME IN DEMOCRAT-RUN CITIES
And How One City Broke That Curse.
By Discover The Networks


http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2634...cover-networks


America's ten most dangerous cities—as measured by federal crime statistics—have one highly notable feature in common: All are led politically by Democratic mayors. Most, in fact, have been controlled by Democrats for a very long time. For example, Detroit, which in 2015 ranked as the nation's most dangerous city, has not had a Republican mayor since 1961. The second most dangerous city in 2015 was Oakland, California, a Democrat stronghold since 1977. Third was Memphis, in Democratic hands since 1991. Fourth was St. Louis, which has been led exclusively by Democratic mayors since 1949. Fifth was Cleveland, where no Republican has been mayor since 1989. Sixth was Baltimore, Democrat-led since 1967. Seventh was Milwaukee, which has elected only Democratic mayors since 1908. Eighth was Birmingham, which has been Democrat-run since 1975. Ninth was Newark, a Democrat bastion since 1933. And tenth was Kansas City, Missouri, which has not seen a Republican mayor in a quarter-century.

New York City, which in the early 1990s transitioned away from nearly half a century of Democratic leadership, serves as a case study not only of how left-wing law-enforcement policies helped breed crime and chaos for a long period of time, but also how the cessation of those policies caused crime to plummet almost instantly.

From 1946 through 1993, New York was led, in succession, by the following Democratic mayors: William O'Dwyer, Vincent Impellitteri, Robert Wagner, John Lindsay, Abraham Beame, Ed Koch, and David Dinkins. Under the stewardship of these men, the city's crime rates rose sharply and consistently, as reflected most starkly in its homicide statistics. In 1960, some 482 homicides occurred within the confines of New York's five boroughs. By 1970, that figure had risen to 1,117. In 1980, it was 1,814. The apex was reached under Mayor Dinkins in 1990, when 2,245 people lost their lives to violence. During the ensuing three years of Dinkins' mayoralty, the city's homicide totals were 2,154, then 1,995, and finally 1,946.

Throughout his four years in office, Mayor Dinkins repeatedly demonstrated weakness and indecision in dealing with criminals. In some cases, he seemed to be openly at odds with the city's police force. For instance, in the early 1990s a Dinkins administration brochure (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v...ry.asp?id=1682) informed its readers that there “won't be peace” until the police stop running “young men of color … off the streets.”

Dinkins' ineffectiveness in dealing with crime had a profound effect on the quality of life in New York, as the incidence of violence in the city reached an all-time high. In 1989, before Dinkins took office, New York was ranked seventh in the Places Rated Almanac (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v...ry.asp?id=1686), which rates cities for their overall livability. By 1993, as Dinkins' term drew to a close, the city had slipped to 105th in the rankings. A 1993 poll of New Yorkers found that 59% felt that life in the city had gotten worse on the mayor's watch, while just 8% thought it had improved.

Republican Rudolph Giuliani replaced Dinkins as mayor in 1994 and quickly transformed New York into the safest big city in America. He did this chiefly by increasing the NYPD's manpower from 28,000 officers to 40,000, and adopting a zero-tolerance approach to crime-fighting. Toward that end, Giuliani hired William Bratton as his police chief. Bratton was a proponent of the “broken windows (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v....asp?id=1633)” criminological theory which contends that maintaining urban environments in a well-ordered condition—and clamping down on petty crimes—ultimately helps prevent not only low-level vandalism, but also the commission of more serious offenses. Thus Bratton instructed police to more strictly enforce existing laws against such relatively minor infractions as subway-fare evasion, public drinking, public urination, and shakedown operations by “squeegee men” demanding payment in exchange for their unsolicited wiping of the windshields on cars stopped at red lights.

Another vital component of Giuliani's crime-fighting approach was the use of COMPSTAT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CompStat), an organizational management tool that employs Geographic Information Systems to map crime and identify specific problem areas. In weekly meetings, NYPD executives met with local precinct commanders to discuss the problems revealed by COMPSTAT and devise strategies to deal with them.

The results of Giuliani's efforts were extraordinary, as evidenced by the fact that during his eight years in office, the incidence of homicide in the city fell dramatically, from 1,946 in Dinkins' final year as mayor, to 1,561 in 1994, to 1,177 in 1995, to 983 in 1996, to 770 in 1997, to 633 in 1998, to 671 in 1999, to 673 in 2000, to 649 in 2001.

When Republican Michael Bloomberg succeeded Giuliani as mayor in 2002, he continued the same anti-crime strategies as his predecessor. As a result, homicide rates in the city fell even lower, with totals (http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloa..._2000_2015.pdf) of 587 in 2002; 597 in 2003; 570 in 2004; 539 in 2005; 596 in 2006; 496 in 2007; 523 in 2008; 471 in 2009; 536 in 2010; 515 in 2011; 419 in 2012; and 335 in 2013.

When Democrat Bill de Blasio succeeded Bloomberg as mayor of New York in 2014, he appointed William Bratton as his chief of police. Despite some changes, most of the Giuliani-Bloomberg policies remained more-or-less in force, and New York's homicide rate stayed at about the level at which it had been when Bloomberg left office.

Those who benefited (http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVM...appers799.html) most, by far, from the policies put in place by Giuliani (and later Bloomberg), were the black and Hispanic residents of such traditionally high-crime areas as Brooklyn's 75th Precinct, Bedford-Stuyvesant's 81st Precinct, and Harlem's 28th Precinct. Indeed, blacks and Hispanics accounted for 79% (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100008...79490354672410) of the decline in homicide victims citywide between 1993 and 2011. Manhattan Institute Fellow Heather Mac Donald estimates (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100008...79490354672410) that “more than 10,000 black and Hispanic males avoided the premature death that would have been their fate had New York's homicide rate remained at its early-1990s apex.” Also between 1993 and 2011, the number of rapes that occurred annually in New York City declined by 54.8%; robberies fell by 80.3%; felony assaults dropped by 57.8%; and burglaries were reduced by 84.6%. This means that many tens of thousands of black and Hispanic would-be victims were spared the anguish associated with those crimes as well.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2634...cover-networks
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 07-14-2016 at 03:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
Israel Forum
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Israel Military Forum