Trump Investigation

Special counsel Robert Mueller has been investigating Donald Trump for over a year and still has not come up with any definite answers. It seems to me that we need to look at where Robert Mueller is at, we know he was hired but by whom?

 

I think its time to look at the whole picture. We know there are a lot of someone’s who want Donald Trump out. I think we should look at who hired Robert Mueller and if they are still pushing him to do what they want. Lets find out who they are and what their interests are. Lets put them in the spotlight and see where it goes.

 

It is really a shame where a few can ruin peoples lives just so they can get what they want. We need to put a stop to them. Make them accountable.trump-elite

Civil War

I received this in my email today, it is so true

An interesting perspective.
How do civil wars happen?

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country.
And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.

That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election There’s a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win. It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.

That’s a civil war.

There’s no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.

This isn’t dissent. It’s not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they’re the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election.

When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship.
Your very own dictatorship.

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate. The Democrats lost Congress They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country. The Democrat’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance His power is unlimited. He’s a dictator.

But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has “discretion” to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the “discretion” to reverse him. That’s how the game is played. That’s how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn’t yet won that particular fight.

When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren’t even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries.

The Constitution has something to say about that.

Whether it’s Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can’t serve in if you’re not a member. If you haven’t been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren’t in the club. And Trump isn’t in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren’t in the club with him.

Now we’re seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.

That’s not a free country.

It’s not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an “insurance policy” against Trump winning the election. It’s not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It’s not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It’s not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn’t supposed to win.

Have no doubt, we’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist Democrat professional government.

David Vincent Gilbert

Ideas

Flag

I have some thoughts about what can be done to help prevent school shootings. I admit I am a strong supporter of the NRA and Second Amendment.

First I think teachers and staff need to be armed. Not only armed but go through a stringent training by qualified instructors. If there had only been one armed personal in the school they could possibly cut down on the students injured. When attacked, we need a strong defense.

For those who oppose the example above I believe they could put camera’s in schools and have it hooked directly to local police and sheriff stations. Remember, they would get there as quick as they can, but in the meantime the shooter is shooting students.

They can put metal detectors at each entrance, but shooters seem to get around them by going in windows and other entrances. They could put screens on windows, but that is only a temporary answer.

Teach students to observe actions and conversions of others, and report if you strongly are concerned about someone. And a strong statement is Listen and Followup.

Where did Liberals come from

John Locke, Rousseau and Voltaire

California is one of the most Liberal states in the union, and I was wondering where Liberalism came from. There are many sites on the internet so I chose this one to post.The above people above were instrumental in forming the party. Though there are others that helped it along. This is a small insert from http://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/1365/how-did-the-term-liberal-become-progressive.

American liberalism, the dominant Ideology of the Democratic Party, was formed from two strands:

Classical liberalism, the philosophy formed in the Enlightenment by thinkers like John Locke, Voltaire, and Rousseau, and providing the driving force for both the American Revolution and the French Revolution, which states that the autonomy of the individual should be maximized, and the individual should be freed from whatever institutions are preventing them from reaching their potential, be it the Church or the State.
Progressivism, a populist reform movement in the early twentieth century, espoused by Presidents like Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, and grounded in Protestant moralism, which sought to make government both more responsive to the plight of the people, for instance using Constitutional amendments to deal with social problems like alcoholism and using government force to quash monopolies, and at the same time more representative of the will of the electorate, for instance instituting more democracy like the direct election of Senators and ending the corruption of Machine politics in the cities.
These two strands were merged into the ideology we call American liberalism by John Dewey and his followers, who argued that we needed a broader conception of liberty than the one maintained by laissez-faire negative-rights libertarians. The key idea can be summed up in a quote from Anatole France: “In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets, and steal loaves of bread.” Basically, the idea is that the freedom to starve because you have no food is not a meaningful freedom at all, because it does not maximize your autonomy or allow your to realize your potential, which were important goals in classical liberalism.

Thus Dewey argued that we should recognize positive liberty as well as negative liberty, meaning that e.g. just as we ought to recognize a right to live without someone killing you, we similarly ought to recognize a right to live without dying due to lack of food. Thus American liberalism advocates that the government should play some role in the economy in order to give people autonomy and enable them to pursue their own happiness, along the lines of the “responsiveness” part of the Progressive philosophy. Thus Americans liberals still try to achieve the goals of classical liberalism, but they sometimes do it through Progressive means. (This is akin to how, as I discuss here, American conservatism tries to achieve the goals of traditionalism, but often through libertarian means.)

There’s one other way that American liberalism differs from classical liberalism: classical liberals took a deontological perspective on liberty, viewing personal autonomy and the pursuit of happiness as things that are inherently worthy of being promoted, regardless of what they lead to. American liberalism, on the other hand, because it emerged partly from Progressivism, tends to take a more utilitarian perspective on such things, viewing autonomy merely as a means to an end, the end being increasing the happiness of as many people as possible. The liberal understanding of utilitarianism is perhaps best understood through the work of John Rawls, who proposed a thought experiment along roughly these lines: suppose that you’re a soul waiting to be born, but you don’t know which body you’re going to be born into and what experiences that body is going to have. But before you’re born, you have the opportunity to design how society and government should be. How should you design it in order to maximize your chances of having a good life? Well, you don’t know what desires you’re going to have, but whatever they are, you’re probably going to want them fulfilled, so you would want a society that as much as possible allows people to pursue their own happiness. And you may end up being born in utter poverty that may prevent you from being happy, or you may start off being wealthy but then you may suffer calamities like disease and natural disasters, so assuming you’re risk averse (as humans tend to be in most circumstances), you’d want the government to have a safety net to shelter you from such risks. So that’s where the basic contours of the liberal position emerge.

Finally, let me mention something about foreign policy. The Progressive presidents advocated a very interventionist foreign policy, since they were motivated by the desire to help people as much as possible, even people abroad. Liberals still share some of this impulse, and are willing to support limited American military intervention in circumstances of extreme humanitarian crisis. But mostly their foreign policy views were taken from classical liberalism, so they they’re antiwar for the most part.

In any case, when contemporary liberals call themselves progressive, they’re hearkening back to their intellectual predecessors.

(I discuss the underpinnings of American conservatism here if you’re interested.)

EDIT: Yuval Levin has just written a book which argues that the positive rights vision of liberalism originated not with Dewey in the early twentieth century as I suggested, but rather in the late 1700’s with Thomas Paine, one of America’s founding fathers. Levin argues that the modern American left-right divide originated in the debate in America and England over the French Revolution. Paine was an enthusiastic supporter of the French Revolution, because he thought that government is an institution deliberately created by people to sageguard their individual liberty, and so it could be overthrown whenever the people thought it wasn’t doing a good job. On the other hand, Edmund Burke, a predecessor to modern conservatism, saw government as an institution that grew organically as a tradition, and that we should be suspicious of making changes to it just because individuals in the current generation happen to object to it. In any case, Paine’s philosophy of individualism led him to believe that an individual can only realize his full potential if he’s not constrained by material want, so he believed in the government providing basic necessities to everyone. Thus, Levin argues, the early twentieth century Progressive movement was merely reinventing the wheel.

My Thoughts

 

 

 

Throw the Stone

John 8:7King James Version (KJV)
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
My family and I have always been Democrats, Until the Party forgot why they were in office and started working for themselves instead of the people. I then switched to The Republican party. And to my dismay I found they were no different.
I have always said we need a Truck driver or laboror to rum for President. But instead we got Donald Trump.
He is a Billionair and isn’t living day by day as we are and in someways dissconected from us which turns a lot of perople away from .
Then I started to listen to him and behind all those comments that his opposition jumps on. I found a person that really wants to make our country great again, Believe me, it needs some changes because we are heading the the wrong way.
Think about it. The lord says if you are without sin throw the first stone. Well you tell me any person male or female that hasn’t looked at another person and hasn’t had a lewd thought at some time in their lives probably a lot of times.
Right now I am ashamed of McCain, Ryan, Rubio and the others who turn their backs on Trump. If they say they are Sin Free, they are liars, Plain and Simple. Maybe we should look at the real reason they are against him, Is it because they cannot control him?
John 8:7King James Version (KJV)
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
My Thoughts

Not sure WHO or WHAT I am anymore..

confused

I have become more complicated, and I want to thank those of you who are brave enough to still associate with me regardless of what I have become.

 

The following is a recap of my current identity:

I was born white, which makes me a racist.

 

I am a fiscal and moral conservative, which makes me a fascist.

I am heterosexual, which makes me a homophobe.

 

I am a Christian, which makes me an infidel.

 

I am older than 70 and retired, which makes me a useless old man or woman!

I think and I reason, therefore I doubt much that the main stream media tells me, which makes me a reactionary.

 

I am proud of my heritage and our inclusive American culture, which makes me a xenophobe.

I value my safety and that of my family, therefore I appreciate the police and the legal system, which makes me a right-wing extremist.

 

I believe in hard work, fair play, and fair compensation according to each individual’s merits, which makes me anti-social.

I, and my friends, acquired a good education without student loans and no debt at graduation, which makes me some kind of odd underachiever.

 

I believe in the defense and protection of the homeland by all citizens, which makes me a militarist.

Please help me come to terms with this, because I‘m not sure who I am anymore!

 

And now, my newest problem: I’m not sure which bathroom to use!?!

My Thoughts

=

Who to Vote for

vote

 

 

Who should I Vote for?
Voting is getting closer, who do I vote for? My friends tell me who they think is the best candidate is, my Parents tell me what they think I should do. The media push a Candidate (They are bias) so what should I do?

The answer is actually pretty simple:
Keep a notebook or smart phone with you and ask everyone questions, ask about security, gun, control, economy, immigration and anything else you can think of. Then put a note down on your reaction to each question and see how you really feel about the answers you get. Then study each candidate and see how close they come to how you really feel about things.

 Remember, we all live with our actions, so make sure this is what you want.giphy
Then Vote!!