Trump Is Rocky Balboa

It is no big secret that Trump won the 2016 election with the help of those who considered him to be their enemy #1.

The more they talked about him the stronger he became. His popularity amongst many was fueled by the breathless outrage and ridicule of him. Those who merciless attacked Trump and his family, called his fans “deplorables” (while calling him a bully nonetheless) made his point for him.

The resistance against Trump has largely failed because it lacks self-awareness, in that they often come across as uncool, meanspirited and hypocritical, and makes Trump look better by comparison. One recent example of this is how the media reacted to an image Trump posted on his Twitter account. It was an obvious Photoshop with the head of the President superimposed onto the body of Rocky Balboa. There was no caption, no explanation, only an image.

One could assume that the President was enjoying the merger of his head onto the body of cinema legend simply because Rocky is an enduring story of a man who overcomes the odds against him and makes up for what he lacks with heart. That alone, likening himself to an underdog and unlikely hero, is good messaging to his target audience. However, it is what came next, the over-the-top reaction to the image, that multiplied the effort and further legitimatized the point.

Trump’s corporate media detractors and regular opponents, rather than let it go or laugh it off with the rest of us, decided to give an alternative explanation to the obvious.

First, rather than find a more appropriate term to describe a Photoshopped image, they (in weird unison) used the word “doctored,” which is a word with a more sinister connotation and implies an intent to deceive. It’s as if they want us to believe Trump was trying to fool us into thinking he had the body of Sylvester Stallone in his prime. I’ll assure you that nobody was in danger of being fooled by the image and we aren’t fooled by those trying to doctor the meaning of the image either.

Second, they tried to add subliminal meaning to the meme that just doesn’t work, claiming that it is symbolic of white fragility, that Trump is out of touch with reality, and other such nonsense that makes a person seem silly outside of the far-left echo chamber. An image of Rocky cannot be redefined in the minds of millions simply because someone hates Trump and is desperate to find any means available to undermine him. In their attempt to add meaning to an image that defies common knowledge of that image they only delegitimize themselves and his more serious opposition.

Instead of hurt Trump, who doesn’t take himself too seriously despite what they say, they are clowns who do take themselves seriously and never realize that their efforts only helps him to make his point about them. In the end they would have been further ahead to do nothing at all. Now, instead of potentially thinking about the absurdity of Trump, a President who acts like an average person on social media, I’m rolling my eyes at the hysterical corporate media overreaction and wondering what planet of humorless insanity they come from.

Trump wins bigly again, revving his opponents up with some self-parody fun, then stepping aside and letting them run themselves into a wall. Trump is always two steps ahead of them, using their partisan aggression against them, and getting his message out by their overreaction. All he needed to do, in this case, is share an image and they spend a week making fools of themselves trying to portray him as the villain for using a cultural icon of heroism.

They came out the losers.

They came out looking like the real villains.

And, adding to their chaos this past week, while Newsweek snarkily reported that Trump was golfing at his resort, the President was actually on his way to visit the troops in Afghanistan and express his thanks for their service.

Again, it would have been better to have said nothing at all, to let people draw their own conclusions, than to try to push an anti-Trump narrative and be exposed.

At very least, in saying nothing, they would not be making Trump seem even more relevant than he already is. But, more significantly, in keeping their mouths shut rather than trying to manipulate public opinion, like the propagandists posing as journalists that they truly are, they would not be giving him an opportunity to contrast himself to them. Trump, in comparison to their unbridled and increasingly irrational rage, makes himself look normal, even likeable.

They swing wildly, exhausting themselves and what little credibility they have left in their flailing wildly to make contact, growing increasingly frustrated that they can’t drop this elusive fool who dared to challenge them. Trump, on the other hand, is strategic, a counterpunching expert, who is actually well-conditioned for the fight despite looking outmatched and appearing to be in over his head. If Trump appears to be up against the ropes, finished, then look out, because he is boxing fan, knows the game well and how to rope a dope. He will always emerge in the later rounds, hit back when it counts the most, and win.

In other words, like it or not, Trump is a real life Rocky Balboa.

The Myth Of Scandal-Free Democrats and Trump Corruption

You know the narrative, Trump associates went to prison and therefore Trump is also guilty by association. It is parroted on comments sections all the time, they will list the number of convictions of known Trump associates and think this is proof of Trump’s corruption or at least his corruption compared to Democrats.

However, is this true?

Does the fact that some Trump associates were convicted mean that his administration is unusually corrupt?

Does the fact that few associated with the Obama administration have been convicted prove that Democrats are not corrupt?

It doesn’t take a whole lot of critical thinking skills to answer no to all of the questions above. No, obviously not, convictions or the lack of convictions is not proof of anything. How soon we forget that those accused of murdering Emmett Till were found not guilty by a jury, despite the evidence, and that was quite common in the racially prejudiced South. It is indeed strange that the same people who tell us that difference in arrests or conviction rates is proof of racism want you to believe that discrimination cannot exist in other forms.

So there is that, there is the reality that justice is not actually blind, that sometimes sentencing is harsher for some than others, that some can get away with crimes that land others in prison for years. Trump signed the First Step Act for this very reason, that some people were being treated far more severely in the court system than others due to legislation signed years ago by then-President Bill Clinton and it wasn’t fair.

And then there’s the fact that Trump associates are convicted of things that are ignored and excused when Democrats do them. Every Trump associate convicted, from Paul Manafort to Roger Stone, has been brought up on process crimes. What that means is that they were not actually guilty of any criminal wrongdoing before the investigation. However, during the investigation itself, they were accused of lying or somehow impeding the investigation and then prosecuted for that!

Of course, not only is that abusive and absurd, but it is also not a standard applied to Democrats who have perjured themselves or committed crimes worse than those which have landed Trump associates in jail. Hillary Clinton herself lied to Congress, destroyed evidence during an investigation, and wasn’t even charged with anything let alone convicted. Other Democrats have lied to Congress and none of them are behind bars, not one of them has been prosecuted.

Obama and parts of his administration love to claim to have been scandal-free and, naturally, the left-wing lapdog media never calls them out on this myth. But the reality is that the Obama administration was far far from scandal-free. Sure, the scandals did not get widely reported or thoroughly investigated, yet that does not mean there was nothing shady going on. No, what it really means is that there was collusion all the way to the top to protect Democrats and their families from criminal prosecution.

Case and point, Hunter Biden, along with John Kerry’s stepson, somehow ended up on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma Holdings, for millions in compensation. That company was under investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor. Representatives from that company came to our State Department to warn them that the sons of these prominent US politicians could be in serious trouble. So Joe Biden, then Obama’s Vice-President, threatens to withhold a billion dollars from the Ukrainian government unless they fire the prosecutor looking into Burisma.

Can you imagine a member of Trump’s family was getting paid millions by foreign companies, Trump ending criminal investigations into those companies by using state power, and the media not turning it into the scandal of the century?

That has not happened.

But the opposite did happen and the corporate media acts like there’s nothing to see there while at the same time going ballistic that Trump has encouraged an investigation into Burisma’s corruption be reopened. So much for allowing the truth to be known! Somehow it is impeachable for Trump to seek the truth about potential foreign interference in our affairs, but not a scandal for the Bidens to use the White House as a means to enrich themselves and their political cronies.

The Democrats are literally trying to impeach Trump for wanting the American people to know the truth about their corruption. How is that not obstruction justice??? How is that not portrayed as a scandal for them?!?

The double-standard is real. If a Republican so much as jaywalks it is treated as a scandal. If a Trump associate does anything that can be turned into a criminal charge it is. Meanwhile, Democrats sell this country out to the highest bidder, trade our Uranium for speaking fees, and it isn’t even investigated at all. The evidence completely implicated Clinton during the server scandal, yet the Obama justice department gave her a pass. I guess it is Democrat privilege, they are above the law, but you are not nor is anyone who stands up to them and their corruption.

If Trump were actually guilty of anything worthy of prosecution it would have been done by now. The impeachment inquiry is nothing but a bunch of fluff, a smokescreen for the Bidens, and a means to manipulate voters. The convictions of a couple of Trump associates for process crimes does not prove any deep corruption on their part. It is rather proof that even the smallest crime of a Trump associate will, without precedent, be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

There is an equal-protection clause for this reason and we need to demand that Democrats stop using the justice system as a tool to punish political enemies. If Democrats don’t go to jail for their crimes, then it is long past time to exonerate Trump associates brought up on process crimes that do not lead to indictments, are not even treated as scandalous, otherwise. It is time to confront this myth of scandal-free Democrats, it is lie based on prosecutorial double-standards and needs to be exposed.

Content Unavailable: The War On Internet Freedom

Social media represented an enter-at-your-own-risk uncharted territory, a frontier space rare in our time, and millions upon millions of us entered into this new digital world. It was a communications revolution, no longer could the big media corporations act as gatekeepers for information.

There was a time, not long ago, when our government officials touted their commitment to internet freedom and decried the censorship of totalitarian regimes around the world. But that commitment was short-lived, when the politically powerful realized that they could not control the narrative as they had for centuries.

The Establishment Fights Back

The powerful have begun to fight back. However, they have not turned to government agencies to do their dirty work this time. No, this time it is a coordinated effort between the corporate media and the tech giant nouveau riche. Tremendous pressure is being put on Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg to silence the real dissent on social media.

This effort to wrest control back from the unwashed masses started with a light application of shadow bans and algorithmic manipulation. Then they came for the fringe, outright banning and deplatforming those deemed to be dangerous by these powerful elites. Of course what is dangerous or not depends on where you stand related to their agenda and has little or nothing to do with the threat someone actually poses.

One of the first steps to take back control was to post “fact check” articles beneath social media posts that, according to them, contained false claims. For this they relied on their own sources, like Snopes, known for their partisan take on the facts and not necessarily fairness. For example, how do you rate the claim that Democrats tried to impeach every Republican president since Ike “mostly false” when they did actually try five out of six?

The so-called fact checkers, that nitpick details to rate something mostly false when it is 80% true, somehow never find a need to question the dubious claims of the corporate media. And that’s because they really aren’t about giving us the facts at all. It is all about controlling the narrative and countering anyone who dares to take on the corporate political and media establishment. Fact checkers are the establishment pretending to be a referee when they are, in reality, a player.

They Don’t Have To Burn the Books…

The other side of this is censorship. In the 1990s there was a song put out by Rage Against the Machine with the lyrics, “they don’t gotta to burn the books, they just remove them!” That was then. That was before the social media age and the anti-establishment presidency of Trump. Before the soft tyranny of the establishment began to encroach on our freedom of speech on social media.

This soft tyranny can be hard to detect as if is often unannounced. But it now pervasive on social media and I’ve recently experienced it first-hand after posting the name of the ‘whistleblower’ on a Facebook page. The post was up for less than an hour before being replaced a “content unavailable” message. Evidently, Zuckerberg, in collusion with the DNC and their corporate sponsors, do not want you to know that man accusing Trump is a well-known anti-Trump partisan.

Now, as always, those behind the censorship will come up with legitimate sounding excuses for their protecting the identity of this man. But let’s be real here, this has nothing to do with the safety of this Obama administration holdover and everything to do with protecting the narrative. If the general public were to find out who this guy really is the whole impeachment stunt falls apart and with that the campaign strategy the establishment planned to use against our populist President.

The reality is that the identity of the ‘whistleblower’ is only a secret because his claim would be put into serious doubt if more people knew. Unfortunately, many who know the Rage Against the Machine lyrics, are on the side of those trying to conceal the truth in the name of protection because they are doing as they are told and hate Trump. They have convinced themselves that the Pelosies, Schumers, Romneys and other career politicians somehow represent them or what is good for the country and have become blind to the danger of censorship.

It Is Time To Democratize Social Media

Whether you love or loath Trump should not matter. In less than a decade the current administration will be history and we will still be stuck with precedents being set. Do we really want our ability to communicate our thoughts and ideas online limited by the CEOs of Apple, Facebook or Twitter? Is it okay for Google to interfere in our elections?

Sure, there is always going to be some fake news to sift through. But, that said, the general public does not have a corner on misleading claims. The corporate media, often in collusion with the political establishment, routinely engages in propaganda and misinformation campaigns. How can we trust those who have interests different from our own to police our online speech? What will stop them from eventually making it impossible to challenge their tightening stranglehold on information?

It is time for the bill of rights to apply to the online town square. It is time for average Americans, no matter who they voted for, to say enough and fight back against the efforts to manipulate the conversation in favor of the elites. The same government that enables these big tech corporations to exist, that uses them as a platform to get information to public, can and should insist that our freedoms not be infringed upon. This is something all Americans should get behind.

We do not need to be told what is or is not acceptable to share amongst ourselves online or anywhere else. We don’t need black voters to be kept in the dark about their #Blexit options. If I want to say “Obama is the Antichrist” or “Trump is literally Hitler” there is no need for Mark Zuckerberg to intervene. Let us have that conversation, to choose to associate with whomever we please, and be free of corporate meddling on behalf of powerful elites.

Update: Since publishing this blog Facebook finally saw fit to inform me of the reason why they removed my post. They claimed that I had “violated community standards” and then warned me that “if this continues” the private group “may be disabled.” The accusation? They said it was “coordinating harm” and gave me a link to what that means. It is absolutely ridiculous, nothing I wrote came close to suggesting harm to anyone, but there is no recourse, no means to appeal, and thus their misuse of their own community standards to quash political dissent cannot be challenged. It is a shame this has not led to a class action lawsuit. Any lawyers out there concerned with abuse of power?

Syria Hysteria Only Shows Trump Is Better Than His Critics

Just when you think the full height of hypocrisy has been reached then this happens: The party of peaceniks, virtually overnight, has transformed into full-on warmongers.

The party that criticized Bush for his, “you’re either for us, or you are with the terrorists,” absolutism and once demanded our immediate withdrawal from Iraq despite the consequences, is now screaming that Trump must continue our military presence in Syria indefinitely or he is in bed with the Turks.

Of course, that is completely absurd.

First, our troops should never have been in Syria, they were not invited, we had no official declaration of war, and their very presence there represented an illegal occupation of a foreign state. But, because it was Obama’s intervention, and despite his assurance there would be “no boots on the ground” before going back on the promise, nobody in the corporate media cared.

Second, Turkey is a NATO ally!

Those saying that we should keep troops in Syria, indefinitely, to defy Turkish intervention are basically suggesting that we go to war with a NATO ally over what is actually regarded to be a terrorist organization.

The corporate media is yelling that Turkey is going to commit genocide against the Kurdish people as a result of Trump pulling a few dozen troops out. But what they don’t tell you is that 12 million Kurdish people already live in Turkey and aren’t currently being slaughtered. The lie is that Turkey is opposed to all Kurds.

The reality is that Turkey is fighting against the YPG/PPK.

Sure, certainly these organizations helped us in our fight against ISIS. However, Turkey, likewise, as a member of NATO, has hosted our strategic nuclear capabilities for many years and was part of our strategy to defend Europe. So are we truly supposed to choose the side of some militias fighting in Syria over a NATO member state?

Trump, like most Americans, is opposed to endless war and most of his opponents had claimed to be anti-war—at least are when it is politically expedient for them. Remember “Bush lied, people died?” In fact, candidate Obama ran on a platform of withdrawal from conflicts in the Middle East, yet he clearly did not keep that promise as president, we still have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, despite having no international or Congressional approval for that military action, he also took us into Syria.

Trump has been consistently anti-war since the time he, reportedly for medical reasons, avoided participation in that quagmire of quagmires otherwise known as the Vietnam War. He has continued that tendency to put economy over war-making in his deescalating rather than responding with force to Iran’s shooting down of a Navy drone. It is actually quite astonishing that a man known for his confrontation style has been the most peaceable President in our time—even Jimmy Carter could not resist military action as Trump has.

Earlier this week the corporate media ridiculed Trump for his letter above urging his Turkish counterpart: “Don’t be a tough guy. Don’t be a fool!” They claim Turkish leader, Erdogan, threw the letter in the trash, criticized his concise communication style as being beneath the presidency and even declared it to be third grade level.

Six hours later, after this letter was received, there was a ceasefire.

What anti-Trump pundits don’t seem to understand is that their own excessive verbosity doesn’t make them more qualified or intelligent than Trump. The reality is most of our decisions aren’t made because were were persuaded through lofty words. In fact, sometimes it is in that lengthy and overly complex explanation that the opportunity is lost for real progress.

Trump is not a President in the same manner as Obama and, as it turns out, his style is much more effective at producing results. His methods are simple but effective, he has perfected a good cop bad cop routine, he effectively mixes compliments with threats and, most of all, disrupts the normal in away that allows him to maneuver for the ends he desires.

Conventional wisdom would have him keep the trip wire of US troops in Syria indefinitely to prevent a Turkish incursion. Then, when the Turks decide to take action, and a US service member was killed, he would either need to draw “red lines” later to be walked back like Obama and look weak or be prepared to go to war with a NATO ally over the aftermath of a civil war we had no business entering into in the first place.

What ever the case, the hysteria that followed the announced withdrawal shows only the desperation of the corporate media and their effort to undermine Trump. It also exposes them as being part of the war profiteering crowd. Sure, maybe they don’t make money directly from selling weapons, but they do use armed conflicts as a means to accomplish their political ends, for ratings, and their seemingly irrational reaction to Trump strategically pulling out exposes this.

Why Black Americans Should Vote For Trump

There is a myth, perpetuated by the Democrats, that somehow, back in the 1960s, they ceased to be the party of racism and were replaced in that role by Republicans. The original claim is that Richard Nixon, as a part of a “Southern strategy,” used racist “dog whistles” to win over those who had been part of the party of the KKK (Democrats *ahem*) and, while no evidence is given, this myth persists, unchallenged, in the Democrat controlled media.

The reality is that Nixon championed desegregation and also signed into law both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act. It was actually Nixon, not Democrats, who was the first President to supported affirmative action against racism. Furthermore, Nixon did not win the Deep South in his first Presidential campaign. So, there is zero indication that this so-called “Southern Strategy” being anything more than a “War Red Plan” (the hypothetical, never acted upon, plan to invade Canada) and the more likely scenario is that it was simply fabricated by Democrats, like the Russian collision narrative, as a means to fear-monger and gain the loyalty of minorities.

Furthermore, claims that Barry Goldwater, who ran against Nixon in the Republican primary, being against civil rights are equally spurious. It is true that Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights act, but on the principle that some matters should be worked out at a state or local level rather than mandated by the Federal government, as a strong proponent of the tenth Amendment, and not in opposition to racial equality. It was, in fact, the Democrats who had stood in the way of the advancement of black Americans in the South and elsewhere.

Nixon did win in a landslide victory in 1972, finally ending Democrat dominance of the Deep South, but he won on the power of a strong economy and foreign policy success—not racial politics.

Verdict: This bit of leftist canon, that Republicans attempted to win the Southern vote through racist “dog whistles” is partisan nonsense. The truth is that all Americans flourished under Nixon’s economy, black, white and otherwise.

As a result of this success Democrats had to come up with a new strategy themselves…

The Democrat Strategy of Exploiting Economic and Minority Fears

One odd bit of history is that many black voters switched party allegiances away from the party of Abraham Lincoln and during a time when many other Democrats were still wearing white robes at night. It began in the 1920s, a consequence of the Great Depression, when Franklin D. Roosevelt lured urban black voters away from the party of freedom and into the grasp of paternalistic government. The “New Deal” began the series of Socialist programs that has, over the past century, ensnared many black Americans into a cycle of dependency and voting out of fear of losing opportunities.

Democrats eventually co-opted the Republican civil rights mantle, albeit in a different form: As before, Democrats remain the party of racial division and hate, but now they use their own legacy of violence and intimidation to scare minority voters into line by accusing their opponents. Democrats, rather than take ownership of their racist slaveholder past, shunt responsibility onto all Americans. They go as far as to use the sins of their own party to tarnish the flag that represented those who died to free the slaves. It is completely stunning that Democrats (and their surrogates in the corporate media) have so thoroughly fooled so many Americans about their clear historic culpability for racial prejudice.

Speaking of potential racist “dog whistles,” it was Hillary Clinton who described offenders, primarily black, as “superpredators” and as a means to justify harsh “three strikes” legislation. Barack Obama had eight years to do something meaningful to address this issue relevant to black communities and did nothing besides continue the Democrat tradition of stoking racial division for electoral gain. It is, in fact, Trump, a man Democrats routinely smear as a racist, who has started to take action to put an end to this injustice. As a result of the “First Step Act,” signed into law by Trump, over 3,100 people have been freed as of this year and more likely to follow.

Many blindly loyal to the Democrat party and reading this may say, “but, wait, didn’t Trump say racist things about Mexicans, Muslims, and others?”

And, of course, that has been the narrative pushed by the far-left and media propagandists. But that only shows how obsessed they are with race and exploiting minority fears. First, Mexicans are not a race nor are Muslims. Both the religion and the nation are open to all races and include people of many backgrounds, so how is it racism? Second, for Trump to say that Mexico does not send us their best is the very opposite of a prejudiced sentiment, it is to acknowledge the reality that there are both good and bad Mexican nationals and therefore reason to legally vet them. Trump is not against legal immigration nor are those who voted for him, but he is opposed to allowing the bad to flow in along with the good—as means to protect all Americans from harm.

Anyhow, of the Americans most harmed by the current Democrat “open borders” policies, it is black Americans often suffer disproportionately and are stuck trying to compete for jobs with those who are here illegally and getting paid under the table. This, along with the outsourcing brought about by Democrat trade policies, is the reason why wages have stagnated for entry level jobs. Sure, those Americans at the top have prospered, but many other Americans have seen their economic opportunities diminish as a result. Which is fine with the Democrats, even desirable, because they have trained many to be dependent on them and the scraps of “free stuff” they offer at the expense of other Americans.

The vision that Trump has is a country with secure borders, for immigration and trade policies that are for the benefit of the common man rather than the political and corporate elites. He is a man who seems to be equally pleased when any American is successful regardless of race and is also willing to call out corrupt politicians despite their race. For example, when Trump fired back at Elijah Cummings, the thirteen term representive of Baltimore, who had attacked him over detaining illegal immigrants, it answering rebuke with rebuke—as Trump does with all Democrat elites.

Verdict: Trump is certainly not politically correct, he does not play by their rules, he’s not afraid to trash talk and punch back against anyone who starts something with him, but nobody accused him of being a racist until after he decided to run for President as a Republican. The evidence of his racism does not hold up to scrutiny and, at very least, he’s not as racist as those who use race as a part of their political hustle.

Black Democrats Are Used As Political Pawns

Democrats will use black colleagues to shield themselves from legitimate criticism, while at the same time targeting black Republicans for daring to challenge their control of the black vote. Black men who dare to think for themselves are portrayed as stupid or mentally ill. For example, when world renowned neurosurgeon, Ben Carson, ran in the Republican primary, he was ridiculed for an odd opinion he held decades ago. Imagine that, a man who used his own intelligence and faith to get out of poverty and they ridicule him.

Meanwhile, when the son of a white far-left woman and a Socialist from Kenya becomes President, any legitimate criticism of this man’s policy is portrayed, by Democrats, as being racist. When Democrats claimed, without any recording or other evidence, that those protesting a huge expansion of government control (the so-called “Affordable Care Act) used racial slurs, the media simply ran with the narrative. Despite many cameras being present and rewards offered by those skeptical of the claim, there was never any evidence besides the accusations made by Democrat elites.

Democrats use accusations of racism for the same reason they push children in front of cameras. They hide their bad ideas behind vulnerable people. Black people are used as human shields, to insulate Democrat elites and their far-left agenda, from critique. It is exploitation and part of a two-pronged strategy to gain political advantage. The first part to silence those who oppose them by branding them as a bully or racist for speaking out. The second part is to create a climate of racial tension and fear intended to keep black Americans from considering their better options.

This is why race relations worsened with President Obama and conditions for black young people are improving under Trump. Trump is about the color green (making the economy great for all Americans) while Obama, as a dedicated leftist and ‘progressive’ Democrat, was oriented towards gimmicks like putting rainbow flags on the White House.

For Democrats race is merely a tool for political ends, a part of a divide and conquer political strategy, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the real and measurable advancement black people. This is why there are white Democrats posing as racial minorities, as a means to advantage themselves politically, think no further than Rachel Dolezal who pretended to be black and used that deception as a means to become a chapter president of the NAACP until exposed. Or, of current Democrat front-runner, Elizabeth Warren, who leveraged a fake Cherokee heritage to rise through the ranks. And does anyone actually believe that Shaun King, a Marxist agitator, is truly black?

The truth is that black Americans are being lied to and used as pawns to advance an ideological agenda that has only led to more poverty for more people as it is applied here. Sure, the Democrats give this proven failure a new name, they use terms like “social justice” and “affirmative action” to describe their agenda. But it is really only about control for them and their political cronies. Like it or not, men like Colin Kaepernick have been manipulated by a web of deception created to mentally imprison them. There was a time when many black Americans fought and died for our country, stood for the true ideals of the flag, and despite facing severe injustices at home. Sadly, the symbol of liberty and justice for all, the greater ideals of this nation, have been under decades of attack by the far-left.

Verdict: Democrats will keep you as pawns rather players. Sure, they might say that they care about black Americans, even pretend to be black to gain trust, but the truth is that their real agenda is power and control for themselves at the expense of all other Americans.

What Do You Have To Lose?

The Democrats have been successful in dividing Americans on all fronts. They may claim to care about the plight of black Americans, women, and the oppressed. But that is a ploy to gain votes, it is mere identity politics, and a desperate strategy change after white robes and burning crosses in lawns ceased to be effective. Trump, by contrast, does not seem to care about race, he certainly does not pander for the black vote. However, a few years into his presidency, with unemployment down and opportunity up for all Americans, his invitation to black Americans in 2016 gains appeal, “what do you have to lose?”

Black Americans, those whom the Democrats use to win elections and then discard, have everything to gain because they have gained under Trump. Trump, despite facing a headwind of Democrat opposition and obstruction, too many false accusations to count, has still almost miraculously managed to turn the Democrat malaise into record growth and economic development. If he had a little help from black Americans, fed up with Democratic lies, he would surely continue his work for criminal justice reforms that he started despite only getting a small percentage of the black vote.

But my vision goes well-beyond four more years of Trump and small improvements for my black fellow Americans. This goes to restoring the hopes of those who dreamed of the greater ideal of this country to be finally realized. As one who came of age in the 1990s, I had believed that racial division was something of a bygone era and loved my classmates of good character regardless of their race. The reality is that most Americans are like me, we want racial harmony, national unity and a chance to move forward together. It is time to reject those who divide Americans by race, who foment fear for political gain, and try something different.

Trump is not the perfect man for the job. He has many flaws. But, in that he has been unfairly targeted by Democrats for not following their rules of speech and conduct, he has something in common with many black Americans who faced similar unfair treatment. Trump is a man who gets it, he understands blue-collar Americans, and also knows the dirt on the cultural elites. That is why they hate him so much, they know that he is slowly but surely exposing what is beneath their facade.

Democrats like putting on “blackface” to win elections. And I’m not talking about Ralph Northam or Justin Trudeau and other leftist politicians who are conveniently allowed to do things that would get a conservative politician ran out of office. Democrats pander to the black community, put on phony accents, carry hot sauce, and cheesily play to various racial stereotypes for votes. Unfortunately, they have not done anything of value for black Americans in the hundred years since FDR convinced struggling Americans that his “New Deal” (aka Socialism) would bring them success.

Socialism hasn’t delivered and never will. We need to end the government programs that have broken the black family and have created a cycle of poverty and dependence. We must reject politicians who plant seeds of envy, anxiety, hate and division. We do not need to be a house divided white and black, male and female, religion against religion. We can, in fact, choose to be one nation, under God, prospering because of our shared faith and hard work, striving together for a better tomorrow, and that is what it means to make America great again.

Verdict: Black Americans have gotten nothing in exchange for their one hundred years of loyalty to the Democrat party, they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by voting for Trump in 2020.

Here We Go Again, Charlie Brown…

Charlie Brown, the signature character of the Peanuts comic strip, would continually have his trust exploited by Lucy his older sister. She would tell him she would hold the football, promise him that this time she really would do as she said and, time and time again, he would fall for the trick.

Many Americans had been hoodwinked. They made the mistake of believing that those in the government and media were people like them, concerned about the good of the country and the American people. They would tell us of scandals, convince us to back their wars or other globalist ambitions and come up with many schemes to convince us to trade our rights for their promises of protection. But more and more are waking up, becoming wise, to the manipulation and games.

Those still buying into the promises and narratives of the political elites are astonished (even terrified) by the success of Donald Trump. They, believing everything they hear or read from the ‘legitimate’ sources, do not understand how propaganda works and that their perception is being created through subtle deception. Many of those fooled are educated and intelligent, they trust the system because it has privileged them, they are blind to the costs that others suffer, are unaware or do not care.

Manufacturing Bias

Liberal blindness is a result of their indoctrination and they are unaware of the echo chamber constructed to keep them in the dark. So, when the corporate propaganda media tells them that a ‘whistleblower’ (who works for the CIA) revealed what is claimed to be a potentially impeachable offense they soak it up like a dry sponge. Likewise, when their designated arbiters of all truth claim that Joe Biden did not mean what he clearly said, that he did not actually do what Trump is being accused of doing without evidence, they reject what their own ears have heard.

It truly is a classic case of confirmation bias. The propaganda media, rather than report things as they happen, carefully selects examples of things that support their political agenda and neglects what goes against it. That is why the New York Times realized that they had committed a grave error in messaging when they told the truth, that Trump urged unity against racism, and changed the headline to “Assailing Hate But Not Guns” and what amounts to negative association word salad.

The point is to seed minds, to exploit availability heuristic bias with cherry-picked examples and create prejudices, caricatures or straw-man versions of their political opposition. Trump, for example, is very intentionally portrayed as the villain, a one-dimensional character, and they almost never report on things that would humanize him. He is supposed to be the epitome of evil, the “literally Hitler” who somehow has Jewish grandchildren and supports Israel against literal anti-Semites—like Democrat Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.

They bury, on the back pages, the stories that they must report for purposes of appearing objective or include information intended to immediately discredit the positive. The AP, for example, rather than simply report the news that Trump signed the largest land conservation bill in over a decade, editorializes and makes sure their readers know about unrelated matters of burdensome and largely ineffective government regulations. They cannot, for one second, allow their mind-numbed readership to consider the good Trump has done.

The Big Lie

But more troublesome, and damaging to Democracy, is this little game they play of putting out a scandalous accusation, repeat it over and over again in headlines, demand countless investigations and endless inquiries in search of evidence, only to walk it back when most people are no longer watching. It is this strategy of lie early and often that was behind the so-called “Steele dossier” (a fake report created by a foreign intelligence agent in collision with the Clinton campaign) used to create the “Russian collusion” narrative.

This big lie, the Democrats accusing Trump of the very things they were doing, led to over two years of special prosecutor Robert Mueller digging for dirt, at great expense to taxpayers, and only turning up process crimes and other matters completely unrelated to Trump and his 2016 campaign. But, rather than admit failure or being wrong, they doubled-down and accused Trump again, this time “obstruction of justice” is what the partisan Witch hunters (along with their witless “useful idiot” accomplices) brayed in a weird and strangely robotic unison.

Meanwhile, the top Democrat candidate, Joe Biden, openly admits a quid pro quo with Ukrainian while part of the Obama administration, where he forced them to fire a prosecutor—looking into this possible corruption of a company that was paying his son Hunter—or not get the billions of dollars promised to them. Biden has bragged openly about this strong-arm tactic, but the corporate propaganda media insists that using foreign policy to protect a family member is, according to CNN, simply getting a “corrupt prosecutor” out and somehow not for “personal advantage.

Let that sink in.

Hunter Biden is paid tens of thousands of dollars a month from a foreign gas company, his father uses his position as Vice-president (with the knowledge of then-President Obama) to end an investigation into the potential corruption of that foreign gas company, and somehow it was the prosecutor that was the problem and not the obvious quid pro quo.

In other words, never mind what Hunter Biden did worthy of investigation, never mind that his father used his office to obstruct justice by having the prosecutor fired, that gets the whole “nothing to see here, move along” treatment. The truth does not matter to the media when it could implicate a Democrat. But, when Trump wants the investigation reopened and the truth to be known, we are told that it is horrendous abuse of power.

Yeah, right…

Talk about cognitive dissonance.

Anyhow, you won’t find that part of the story on a Google search engine. Apparently, they have scrubbed the results in coordination with other powerful political elites and multi-national corporations with a pro-establishment/anti-Trump agenda.

I found it using DuckDuckGo.

What you will find instead is dozens of stories accusing Trump of a quid pro quo for suggesting, to the Ukrainian leaders, that the fired prosecutor’s investigation is reopened. But now, what was supposedly not for personal advantage when Joe Biden did it, is being portrayed foreign interference, a threat to Joe Biden personally, and they say is a potentially impeachable offense.

They contradict themselves.

If it was not for a *personal* advantage that Biden forced a premature end to the investigation, how does it now become *personally* damaging to Biden to reopen the investigation?

Democracy and Disinformation

Unfortunately the media propaganda sponges don’t think through this critically, they never question the narrative they are being force-fed and think they are smarter for their lack of skepticism. They never see the misinformation campaign, they never consider the pattern of wildly speculative claims about Trump and conservatives turning out to be falsehoods.

For instance, when those Covington Catholic boys were accused of harassing a Native American and video evidence showed the opposite of what had been reported, many still cling to the original narrative. Or the many hate hoaxes, most prominently Jussie Smollett, that dominate headlines before the truth comes out and the story disappears, the faithful lemmings of the establishment never seem to consider this pattern of behavior.

Those who trust the establishment are like Charlie Brown perpetually being misled continually and mocked, but hopelessly gullible and unable to make the correct deduction about the game that is actually being played. Lucy, they reason, is someone like them, sincere and trustworthy, so they line up to kick, full of anticipation, only to have the ball yanked away at the end and end up flat on their back again. They never realize that, behind closed doors, they are the butt of the joke.

We are assured, this time it is different, this time Trump has done something that will certainly end his presidency, only to have the initial claim fall apart under scrutiny and replaced by the next fantastic (but false) allegation of misconduct. It is a disinformation campaign and the stooges to the establishment never catch on, they still believe there must be a grain of truth (or it would not be reported, right?) and simply accept the narrative despite the lack of evidence.

But more are becoming wise to the tactics being employed against them. They compare the breathless speculation to the eventual results, they see the things that are being ignored (or memory holed by Google) and realize that there is some kind of game being played.

The most insane part of the latest accusation against Trump is that it comes from someone in the CIA. A true whistleblower, at least until recently, was someone with direct or first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing, but somehow that standard was gutted to allow hearsay and rumors. The claim against Trump is not based on anything actually witnessed. So basically what you have is a serious charge without serious evidence to back it and from someone within an agency known for election interference, disinformation, and lies.

Does anyone truly believe that someone employed by the CIA, an agency that has interfered in elections around the world, killed leaders that stood in their way and ran drugs, can be trusted?

How quickly people forget the long history of our government spreading lies to drive public opinion one way or another.  There is a long string of wars we were manipulated into supporting by our intelligence community and by the political establishment that currently opposes Trump.  Why should we take the word of CIA ‘whistleblower’ now?

The real story is that the Democrats and corporate media are, in collusion with the CIA against Trump. They ignore the clear conflict of interest and corruption of Biden using the office of the Vice-Presidency to obstruct an investigation into his son, he openly brags about it and yet that is not malfeasance according to the political establishment. But then when Trump merely suggests that the investigation be reopened, that is somehow an impeachable offense and will likely be the story rammed down our throats for the next few years.

Democracy depends on a critical mass of people driven by moral principles rather than by their political agenda.  The past few years have proven that many will abandon all standards in order to remove Trump from office.  We should be skeptical.  They’ve fooled us once, let’s not be fooled again, okay?

Bill Maher and the Mostly Ignored History of Left-wing Violence

Can you imagine if Ruth Bader Ginsberg died and a conservative pundit celebrating her death and hoping it was painful?

The corporate media and political establishment would express outrage. Not only would they likely accuse the pundit of being a misogynistic anti-Semite (given Ginsberg’s Jewish ancestry) they would also blame Trump and demand every Republican apologize.

However, when Bill Maher said he was “glad” David Koch was dead and that “I hope the end was painful,” yet this vileness is simply called being “candid” by the corporate media.

The Koch brothers, conservative billionaires, were routinely demonized by leftist politicians. For example, Barack Obama, in 2015, said it was “un-American” for the brothers to exercise their rights in opposition to his “green energy” policies. Nevermind, as dedicated Libertarians, they opposed all government subsidies and would rather let the truly free market pick winners.

Recently the Koch’s joined with far-leftist billionaire, George Soros, in the creation of a think-tank, the Quincy Institution, for the expressed purpose of encouraging diplomatic rather than militaristic solutions to world problems. The Koch’s did not support Trump’s tariff policies on principle. They lobbied in favor of free trade and argued against stricter border controls, which put them at odds with Trump’s “America first” agenda.

Still, despite this, the leftist media portrays them as one and the same as Trump, refusing to understand the nuances of conservative thought. To them, you need to share every radical leftist opinion they have or they want you to suffer and die.

Long History of Ignored Leftist Violence

Maher’s hateful outburst, already downplayed in reports, will likely result in no real consequences for him professionally or otherwise.

This is not the exception. Left-wing violence and hate are routinely omitted from history books. For example, the assassination of Idaho governor, Frank Steunenberg, in 1905, by a man who claimed to have been hired by the Western Federation of Miners (WFM was instrumental in founding the Industrial Workers of the World) to kill the man who had, despite his union sympathies, stood up against far-leftist violence a few years before.

In 1899, in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, WFM union thugs commandeered, at gunpoint, a freight train full of dynamite. They would go on to use the stolen cargo to totally destroy a state-of-the-art mill in Wardner, Idaho, run by the non-union Bunker Hill Mining Company, but not before gunning down an employee (on the site) after ordering him to run. The reason for this cold-blooded murder and senseless waste of resources? Bunker Hill Mining Company had refused their demands to unionize.

It is because of this event and others that then Idaho governor Steunenberg was forced to intervene to restore order. He would not be allowed to retire in peace.

Far-leftist terror bombings and assassinations were not unusual over a century ago. In 1919 a whole slew of mail bombs were delivered to politicians, government officials and businessmen and journalists who stood in the way of anarchist and Socialist aims. These bombings resulted in a couple of deaths. This, however, inspired the far more deadly Wall Street bombing, on September 20th of 1920, when a cart full explosives was parked across from the headquarters of JP Morgan Bank in the Financial District of Manhattan. The result was 38 dead instantly in the blast, along with 143 seriously wounded and hundreds more were less severely injured.

Various left-wing terrorist groups have sprung up in the time since then from the Weather Underground to Venceremos, Black Liberation Army, Symbionese Liberation Army, and ANTIFA. The particular grievance changes slightly, guns have become the weapon of choice (the Dayton ANTIFA terrorist used a popular rifle), but the underlying Marxist philosophy and use of indiscriminate violence to accomplish political ends remains.

Once Socialists gain power in government they become even more abusive, albeit usually in less visible ways like internment camps and Gulags or by other indirect means. But with far-left governments, you always do things their way or they will treat you as a threat to be eliminated. When a leftist speaks of ‘rights’ they do not mean respect for your life, liberty or pursuits, it is merely a tool for them to gain power for themselves, a means for them to gain control over resources or over individuals who stand in the way of their agenda and nothing more.

Meanwhile, Another Phony Rise of Right-wing Violence?

The corporate propaganda media, along with government ‘intelligence’ bureaucracies, for political reasons, push this myth of a rise in right-wing violence. They use this as an excuse to write new legislation and to crack down on people mostly minding their own business—or at least were until provoked by government aggression.

Recall, the 1990s, when Janet Reno’s justice department and the left pushed a narrative of a right-wing threat?

Starting with a phony crisis, in 1993, that eventually led to an ATF raid and FBI siege of a compound of religious separatists in Waco, Texas—resulting in dozens of completely avoidable civilian deaths?

Or the Ruby Ridge incident in 1992, where Randy Weaver, a man with some extreme views yet an isolationist and not a threat to anyone, who was falsely accused of assassination threats by an angry neighbor, was coaxed by a government agent into sawing off shotgun barrels, which became the basis of criminal charges, leading to an invasion of his property and the wrongful deaths of his pets, his family and a friend?

Both of these cases are what provoked the violent retaliation of two men, Timothy McVeigh, and Terry Nichols, who bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in 1995. All of this violence completely avoidable had the government not acted in precisely the way that would confirm the worst fears of those who thought of it as corrupt and tyrannical. However, now, without context, the Oklahoma City bombing is presented as proof of a right-wing threat and not as blowback against deadly government abuse of power.

Right-wing violence stopped being an issue as soon as the Clinton Administration was out of power and the harassment campaign ended. The right, unlike the left that fights for control over others, simply wants to be free to live their own lives. Many would probably not even vote if they felt that the government would stay out of their business, not try to take more of their money or constantly threaten their right to bear arms. It is only now, with the rise of far-left ANTIFA, hatred of Trump supporters and online censorship, that some on the right are feeling some pressure again.

The right only rises in response to left-wing violence or when the government begins to infringe on their individual rights. It starts as a defensive reaction to the aggression of others and never as offensive. When the right takes power they deregulate, cut taxes, end foreign military interventions and distribute power rather than redistribute confiscated resources. By contrast, the left, they use government to force others to pay for the “free” stuff they’ve promised and often try to provoke a crisis as a means to expand their control over individuals and solidify their grip—which is why the corporate leftist media is running with the right-wing violence narrative.

Leftist Envy Kills

Capitalists are often accused of being greedy for supposedly prioritizing profits over the good of people. The left wants you to think of the wealthy as Scrooge McDuck swimming in a vault full of gold coins or a comic book villain trying to find new ways to screw the unwitting masses out of fair wages while destroying the planet at the same time.

The irony is that this is likely a projection of the critics own corrupt motives as much as it is a reflection of the actual reality of what energizes men like the Koch brothers—who donated vast sums of money to cancer research and keeping both PBS and Nova funded.

Greed is certainly not good, but envy is far worse.

Envy kills.

Envy justifies hatred and violence against anyone who has a little more. Maher’s hatred of Koch is a great example. Maher is said to have a net worth of $100 million dollars and has never produced anything of value in his life. He is extremely wealthy, yet is still angry because he doesn’t have the same amount of influence as the Koch brothers and thinks he could do better than them. It is classic leftist envy, it is why leftists are dangerous people, they are provoked simply by your success and, given their warped envy-driven values, feel entitled to anything you have.

The Democrats and the complicit corporate media fear-monger about far-right violence. Meanwhile, ANTIFA is beating up random people in the streets and young men with extreme left-wing opinions go on murderous sprees in Dayton and El Paso. The left attacks men like the Koch brothers as greedy and destructive of the environment. But then, like former President Obama, live in their multi-million dollar homes in places that they claim will soon flood because of climate change, but hate Trump. It is this kind of hypocrisy that makes many doubt the popular narrative of anthropomorphic global warming and suspect another leftist power-grab scheme.

It has consistently been the left that plays the part of the aggressor. They always have a cause. They hide cancerous envy in terms like “social justice” and “white privilege” as a means to manipulate the unsuspecting, but their hearts are full of rage, bitterness, malice, and slanderous accusations. Instead of taking responsibility for their own failures they always point a finger of blame and invariably their envy becomes an excuse to do violence. Like Cain who was angry because his brother Abel’s sacrifice was blessed, the left will beat you to death using a rock because you worked hard, bought a piece of land and earn a modest profit by renting it to them.

The Orange Man Bad Farce

Trump is supposedly the evilest man of our time, supposedly worse than Hitler because he doesn’t completely accept the leftist mantra on climate change, and has been continually railed against for his counterpunching. He also continued his feud with Senator McCain after the warmongering Republican (RINO according to many) passed away from brain cancer. McCain had gone after Trump ferociously and apparently used the fake Russian dossier as a means to hamstring the new administration. But Trump, having every reason to be upset, has never done what Maher did. Trump did not cheer about the death of McCain nor wish that he suffered.

In fact, Trump has actually wished well, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, a liberal justice, saying “I’m hoping she’s going to do fine.” And this perfectly illustrates the difference between conservatives and the far-left. Trump will spar with opponents in the political sphere, he fights their fire with fire, and yet he still has not attempted to destroy them personally as many on the left do.

It is the left that doxxes and endangers schoolboys for merely wearing a MAGA hat. It is the left that sucker-punches a man out on a date for the same reason. But then we are supposed to believe that it is right-wing intolerance and Trump we need to fear?

This is just a continuation of the unprovoked leftist attacks that span over a century and nothing new. The left will destroy by any means available to them, through fear, violence, and intimidation, but the moment you step up to them they will play the victim—like they do with Trump.

The left is the schoolyard bully that takes your lunch if you let them or cries to the teacher when you stand up to them. The misdeeds of the left are conveniently forgotten or treated as a legitimate response, but pity the conservative who dares to say “no” to their demands or fight back. Maher hates the Kochs because he can’t control them. Trump, likewise, is hated by the left because he’s not intimidated by their nasty accusations. If we are to survive as a free people we will need both educate our neighbors about the true nature of the left and also learn to not care when the left tells the world that we are bad people for opposing their radical agenda.

We should not fear them. They do not have the moral high ground.  Both leftist activists and governments have a long long history of hate and violence.