Against the Wanton Destruction of US History and Monuments

Posted by Tina

I’m appalled and deeply opposed to the leftist movement to rewrite our history and destroy monuments that represent and teach future generations the truth about our history. I implore all citizens to seek out the truth of our history and resist the current destructive anti-American factions who present their positions with phony appeals of racism and bigotry. Walter Williams issues an historical reminder and warning in his article in The Advocate, “Walter E. Williams: Removal of Confederate-era monuments an Orwellian disregard for U.S. history”

George Orwell said, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” In the former USSR, censorship, rewriting of history and eliminating undesirable people became part of Soviets’ effort to ensure that the correct ideological and political spin was put on their history. Deviation from official propaganda was punished by confinement in labor camps and execution.

Today there are efforts to rewrite history in the U.S., albeit the punishment is not so draconian as that in the Soviet Union. New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu had a Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee monument removed last month. Former Memphis Mayor A.C. Wharton wanted the statue of Confederate Lt. Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, as well as the graves of Forrest and his wife, removed from the city park. In Richmond, Virginia, there have been calls for the removal of the Monument Avenue statues of Confederate President Jefferson Davis and Gens. Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and J.E.B. Stuart. It’s not only Confederate statues that have come under attack. Just by having the name of a Confederate, such as J.E.B. Stuart High School in Falls Church, Virginia, brings up calls for a name change. These history re-writers have enjoyed nearly total success in getting the Confederate flag removed from state capitol grounds and other public places.

Slavery is an undeniable fact of our history. The costly war fought to end it is also a part of the nation’s history. Neither will go away through cultural cleansing. Removing statues of Confederates and renaming buildings are just a small part of the true agenda of America’s leftists… (emphasis mine)

The history of slavery in America predates the founding of our nation when the colonies were governed by the King of England. Attitudes were changing during the period of our founding:

The Revolution was the turning point in the national attitude-and it was the Founding Fathers who contributed greatly to that change. In fact, many of the Founders vigorously complained against the fact that Great Britain had forcefully imposed upon the Colonies the evil of slavery. For example, Thomas Jefferson heavily criticized that British policy:

He [King George III] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. . . . Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce [that is, he has opposed efforts to prohibit the slave trade]. 3

Benjamin Franklin, in a 1773 letter to Dean Woodward, confirmed that whenever the Americans had attempted to end slavery, the British government had indeed thwarted those attempts. Franklin explained that . . .

. . . a disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty, and that even the Virginia Assembly have petitioned the King for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed. 4

Further confirmation that even the Virginia Founders were not responsible for slavery, but actually tried to dismantle the institution, was provided by John Quincy Adams (known as the “hell-hound of abolition” for his extensive efforts against that evil). Adams explained:

The inconsistency of the institution of domestic slavery with the principles of the Declaration of Independence was seen and lamented by all the southern patriots of the Revolution; by no one with deeper and more unalterable conviction than by the author of the Declaration himself [Jefferson]. No charge of insincerity or hypocrisy can be fairly laid to their charge. Never from their lips was heard one syllable of attempt to justify the institution of slavery. They universally considered it as a reproach fastened upon them by the unnatural step-mother country [Great Britain] and they saw that before the principles of the Declaration of Independence, slavery, in common with every other mode of oppression, was destined sooner or later to be banished from the earth. Such was the undoubting conviction of Jefferson to his dying day. In the Memoir of His Life, written at the age of seventy-seven, he gave to his countrymen the solemn and emphatic warning that the day was not distant when they must hear and adopt the general emancipation of their slaves. 5

While Jefferson himself had introduced a bill designed to end slavery, 6 not all of the southern Founders were opposed to slavery. According to the testimony of Virginians James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and John Rutledge, it was the Founders from North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia who most strongly favored slavery. 7

Yet, despite the support for slavery in those States, the clear majority of the Founders opposed this evil.

The creation of America, through the writing of Constitution, succeeded despite the ongoing conflict over slavery. Agreed upon language in the Constitution ensured that slavery would one day come to an end as citizens acknowledged the practice as an evil against the God they worshiped and an affront to their own Declaration of Independence…”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…”

The following represent just a few of the many quotes on slavery expressed by our founders, some of whom had held slaves under British rule:

But to the eye of reason, what can be more clear than that all men have an equal right to happiness? Nature made no other distinction than that of higher or lower degrees of power of mind and body. . . . Were the talents and virtues which Heaven has bestowed on men given merely to make them more obedient drudges? . . . No! In the judgment of heaven there is no other superiority among men than a superiority of wisdom and virtue. 11 Samuel Adams, Signer of the Declaration, “Father of the American Revolution”

I am glad to hear that the disposition against keeping negroes grows more general in North America. Several pieces have been lately printed here against the practice, and I hope in time it will be taken into consideration and suppressed by the legislature. 14 Benjamin Franklin, Signer of the Declaration, Signer of the Constitution, President of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society

That men should pray and fight for their own freedom and yet keep others in slavery is certainly acting a very inconsistent, as well as unjust and perhaps impious, part. 16 John Jay, President of Continental Congress, Original Chief Justice U. S. Supreme Court

The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. . . . And with what execration [curse] should the statesman be loaded, who permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other. . . . And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. 17 Thomas Jefferson

I have seen it observed by a great writer that Christianity, by introducing into Europe the truest principles of humanity, universal benevolence, and brotherly love, had happily abolished civil slavery. Let us, who profess the same religion practice its precepts, and by agreeing to this duty convince the world that we know and practice our truest interests, and that we pay a proper regard to the dictates of justice and humanity! 19 Richard Henry Lee, Signer of the Declaration, Framer of the Bill of Rights

I hope we shall at last, and if it so please God I hope it may be during my life time, see this cursed thing [slavery] taken out. . . . For my part, whether in a public station or a private capacity, I shall always be prompt to contribute my assistance towards effecting so desirable an event. 20 William Livingston, Signer of the Constitution; Governor of New Jersey

The commerce in African slaves has breathed its last in Pennsylvania. I shall send you a copy of our late law respecting that trade as soon as it is published. I am encouraged by the success that has finally attended the exertions of the friends of universal freedom and justice. 25 Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration, Founder of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, President of the National Abolition Movement

Justice and humanity require it [the end of slavery]-Christianity commands it. Let every benevolent . . . pray for the glorious period when the last slave who fights for freedom shall be restored to the possession of that inestimable right. 26 Noah Webster, Responsible for Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution

America’s founding occurred at a time in history when slavery was being greatly challenged and attitudes were changing. We can be proud that our founders fought to end slavery and acknowledge the humanity and equality of all human beings. Change in attitudes and practice did not come quickly enough but change has come. But now the radical left has mounted an activist effort based on fake accusations of racism to use as a hammer to destroy their opposition. They’ve decided that removing monuments and rewriting history is necessary because citizens are “offended” by the presence of both. But just a cursory glance at the attitudes of those causing violence in our streets, at the rhetoric in major newsrooms, at the selective history taught in in our classrooms, and even the positions of some of the Representatives and Senators within the halls of Congress show that current generations of Americans are ignorant about the founders and the history of our nation. They are beginning to look like fools and it doesn’t take an ivy league education to see where this line of attack will lead. The Southern slave owners who wanted slavery to continue are the forebears of the Southern Democrats who formed the KKK and who fought civil rights legislation throughout the years following the end of the Civil War. If they are going to rewrite history and remove all monuments won’t they eventually have to condemn and remove themselves and their own party?

We should never be affronted by or fear the truth of our history. America stands as a shining example of a people choosing good over evil and of overcoming the bonds of tyranny and oppression. Our monuments stand as teaching tools and reminders of the blood stained ground on which we can proudly stand. I resent the ignorant fools standing in the streets but I despise the powers behind them filling their heads with garbage and stirring attitudes of violent revolution for their own elitist power. I will fight them tooth and nail to preserve this great nation as founded.

Your thoughts?

This entry was posted in Constitution and Law, Education, Religion. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Against the Wanton Destruction of US History and Monuments

  1. Post Scripts says:

    The Civil War monuments and statues ought to remain for the purposes of education, a reminder of our history, where we were and where we are now. I’m a big fan of history.
    In Europe we have Nazi tanks, planes, uniforms and even war memorials on display in many places, why? Because its important to our education. People who would impulsively tear down civil war memorials remind me of the Taliban blowing up ancient religious sites because that wanted only their own religious sites to be seen. What they got for their destruction was stupid on full display for the world to see.

  2. Harold says:

    So when do we take the faces of slave owners off the face of Mount Rushmore?

    Or eradicate the name of Robert Byrd the Democrat senator from West Virginia who recruited 150 of his friends and associates to create a new chapter of the Ku Klux Klan and whose name is on a assortment of least 50 plus Buildings, bridges, hospitals, libraries and highways.

    Seems a revisionists’ work is never done!

    • Chris says:

      Robert Byrd completely disavowed his Klan membership and supported civil rights causes in the last few decades of his life. He ended up getting 100% ratings from the NAACP. Leaving that out is misleading and dishonest.

      • Tina says:

        How accommodating you are to a man that used the N-word on national television. When I brought this up before you made excuses.

        Byrd was wily enough to secure over a billion in pork for his state, I imagine he was just as clever about his past when seeking office as a politician in the age of civil rights.

        You don’t give Trump any leeway even though he has been targeted and attacked since he came down the escalator and has worked to clarify statements. He’s not a practiced politician nor are wily political games his bag. But you cut him zero slack.

        The left and radical blacks don’t accept the Founding Fathers statements regarding slavery, some of them quite profound considering the times, and eloquent, simply because they were “old,” or “white,” or “men” who owned slaves when slavery was accepted in society.

        Why the double standard?

        • Chris says:


          I made no excuses for Byrd, though I did put his horrible statements in context.

          I won’t defend him any further, as I have no need to. All I said was this:

          “Robert Byrd completely disavowed his Klan membership and supported civil rights causes in the last few decades of his life. He ended up getting 100% ratings from the NAACP. Leaving that out is misleading and dishonest.”

          I stand by that statement. It is true. If you believe he was an irredeemable person, or that his later embrace of civil rights was a cynical ploy, you are welcome to those opinions and I have no basis for contradicting them. But bringing up his KKK past as a gotcha, when he renounced that past entirely, is still misleading and dishonest.

          Trump was never in the KKK, and I believe I said myself that I do not think he agrees with the white supremacists who support him. I critique (attack, in your words) him when I believe it is fair. There is no double standard; I never said he was any better or worse than Byrd.

          Leftists who condemn the Founding Fathers as nothing but evil slave owners while ignoring their contributions to the ideals of equality and the freedoms we enjoy today are extremist idiots, and I want nothing to do with them. Painting a one-sided picture of them based on their practice of slavery (which many of them struggled with) is just as misleading as bringing up Byrd’s KKK membership without also mentioning his renunciation of such views and his later turn toward civil rights. There is no difference.

      • Harold says:

        The point of mentioning Byrd, like the faces on Rushmore was the point of hypocrisy and selective direction some groups could seek to destroy symbols pertaining to Americas history.

        Of late, America almost seems like the burning of books in 1930’s Germany by the German Student Union. When something is considered as a opposition to another’s beliefs these days you don’t have the right to dismantle it, let it serve as a reminder of past events, it is not always necessary to destroy things you disagree with, or try to restate another’s comment for your own purpose.

        Yes Byrd strongly supported the Klan for a time, before he ran for Federal office in 1952 ,then he disavowed them publicly and more than once while in office by his own admission, I find actions like that politically expedient, and I would suspect so did Byrd.

        Like other politicians of his parties ilk, he supported things before public opinion suggest he shouldn’t..

        Byrd’s stand Against Civil rights, Negro’s serving side by side with whites, anti LGBT. abortion issues are examples.

        Here’s his wiki link, it is a better and more complete picture of the man, let the readers reach their own conclusions about Byrd, he was multi faceted, but he was no diamond.

        (Using the 100% NAACP in your rebuttal is like family’s of Jeffery Dahmer’s victim’s praising him for not letting flesh go to waste)

        Byrd was his own man, and as such he understood his actions, and acted as needed.

        Nothing misleading about Byrd or his first first steps with the Klan, nor my attempt at the irony or maybe satire while he was in office, you just have to consider that Byrd changed directions often, and often started on the current unpopular side of history, I could liken his action to that of Robert E. Lee who put his family’s values first during the civil war. But that is who he was, as Byrd

      • Peggy says:

        Chris, Interesting you’ll justify the behavior of a member of your party from a few years ago, but not those who lived hundreds of years ago in a completly different world.

        Byrd’s life style was by choice filled with hatred for blacks and others who were different.

        Many slave owners were even black. Fact is the first slave owner reported was black. Slave labor was a necessity not a choice during our nation’s beginning years.

        Byrd’s name should be removed from every public building paid for with tax dollars. His hateful legacy should not be honored. He’s a disgrace to his state and the country.

        The same fate should apply to Andrew Jackson, for his treatment of American Indians and the Trail of Tears, and to FDR for his treatment of the Japanese and Germans during WWII.

        One Byrd Gets Lion’s Share Of Earmarks:

        “Oh, and W. Wilson needs to be completely wiped out of our hisory as if he never existed. The harm he did to blacks and other minorities are still being felt today.

        At age 90, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia has been in the Senate longer than anybody else. And he’s spent much of that time as head of the most powerful spending committee, with extraordinary control over earmarks – grants of your tax dollars without the normal public review, CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports for Follow the Money.
        Byrd was the first senator to rack up a total of $1 billion in earmarks for his home state.

        That was in 1999. Today he’s past the $3 billion mark.

        In his famously colorful Senate speeches, Byrd has repeatedly defended his earmarks.

        “Hear me!! Some members have asserted that all, all, all earmarked funding is wasteful spending or an abuse of power,” Byrd said. “Hogwash!”

        And though tradition frowns on sitting members of Congress funding projects in their own name, they don’t seem to have a problem with it in Byrd Country. West Virginia is full of ventures paid for with your tax dollars but named after him.

        You can take the Robert C. Byrd Highway to the Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dam, explore space through the Robert C. Byrd Telescope, and work at the Robert C. Byrd Hilltop Office Complex.

        In all, we found more than 40 projects bearing the Byrd name. Many of them sound perfectly reasonable, but the problem is other needy communities never get a crack at the money.

        “He’s unabashedly unapologetic about his earmarking,” said watchdog Leslie Paige, who calls the earmarks “Byrd droppings.”

        “It’s always been ‘to the victor goes the spoils’ with these earmarks,” said Paige, who works for Citizens Against Government Waste. “Which means if you’ve got a member who sits on a powerful committee, you’re gonna get the lion’s share of that money.”

        But it’s made Byrd a hero back home.

        “Yeah man, you’re lookin’ at Big Daddy. Big Daddy!”

        Remember also, it was FDR who forced Japanese into interment camps and Germans out of the US.

        Note the common thread that every single one of these men from Jackson to Byrd was a Democrat. Are you really still proud of your party or are you ready to finally see it for it’s hateful truth?

        FLASHBACK: DEMOCRAT President Franklin D. Roosevelt Put Japanese AMERICAN CITIZENS In Internment Camps After 1 Attack:

        • Peggy says:

          Correction to my above post. It should read:

          Oh, and W. Wilson needs to be completely wiped out of our hisory as if he never existed. The harm he did to blacks and other minorities are still being felt today.

          One Byrd Gets Lion’s Share Of Earmarks:

          “At age 90, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia has been in the …..

          • Chris says:

            Peggy, American presidents should continue to be honored regardless of their atrocities. Treasonous leaders of separatist governments that formed for the express purpose of sustaining white supremacy–which is what the Confederates said was their primary purpose–should not be. This is not a double standard. If you truly agree that we should get rid of monuments to FDR, Wilson and Jackson then we should also get rid of monuments to the Founding Fathers. There will be monuments to Trump some day too, as there are to every president, even Nixon. I would not oppose this; while I think Trump is a terrible president, he has still ascended to the nation’s highest office and the office must be respected.

            I would not protest changing the names of highways and libraries that currently bear the name of Robert Byrd. It’s just a name. However, it appears to me that the black community at large accepted Byrd’s apologies for his past and commended his attempts to do better. Whether his reform was genuine or calculated cannot be known, but given that he was a Democrat I know the Republicans here will assume the worst. Given his previous KKK membership I cannot even blame you for that this time.

            I would consider the calls for the removal of Byrd’s name from government buildings and such more authentic if they were coming from the black community, not from Republicans who want to prove that Democrats are the “real” racists. But again, I understand the point that we shouldn’t honor anyone who was ever in the KKK, even if they later turned against it, and I would not oppose such removals.

            One last thing: it is not Democrats who fly the stars and bars today. The alt-right protesters who stormed Charlottesville this weekend did not vote for the Democrat candidate, and were very clear in their support for the Republican president. I understand that the standard conservative line is that the Southern Realignment is a myth. If that is so, what is your explanation for why white Southerners who fly the Confederate flag are now solidly a Republican base? If Democrats are the same party today as they were when Southern Democrats started the KKK and Jim Crow, shouldn’t these people be Democrats?

          • Peggy says:

            You missed my point about removing names. If some are removed because they’re offensive to some, where will it stop? It won’t, is the answer. There’s talk about renaming George Washington park in Chicago and removing his statue.

            As for the buildings and structures with Byrds name on them he got ALL of them built because he was head of the committee that allocated the funds to build them. He didn’t raise the funds like hospitals do when someone donates their money for a new wing. He took billions from the nation’s taxpayers and slapped his name on them to make it look like they were a gift from him. No wonder the people of his state including the black ones love what he did. Talk about mantra from heaven. He sat on the pot of gold and had the keys to boot.

            Here’s an interesting story about Mr. Byrd.


            By Bill McAllister March 13, 1991
            CLARKSBURG, W.VA. — Madeline G. Phillips, executive director of the Harrison County Chamber of Commerce, vividly recalls the wintry day in February 1990 when a man walked into her office and demanded all the information she had about her economically depressed community.

            “Now, I can’t tell you who I am,” the man said, seeking to assure Phillips. “But if you have any doubts, call Senator Byrd and tell him a scuzzy little guy is here and he’ll tell you I’m legit.”

            It wasn’t until a few months later that Phillips and the 18,058 other residents of this mountain town discovered how legitimate the would-be industrialist was. He was, in fact, an FBI agent with a simple mission: to help Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) funnel millions of federal dollars into West Virginia.

            For Clarksburg, the prize was the biggest federal plum the former Senate majority leader had ever plucked for his state in his 38 years in Washington. With the backing of FBI Director William S. Sessions, the senator snatched the FBI’s 2,600-employee fingerprint center from the J. Edgar Hoover Building in downtown Washington.”

            Chris, “If that is so, what is your explanation for why white Southerners who fly the Confederate flag are now solidly a Republican base?”

            Why? That’s an easy one to answer. Because you democrats and the media have convinced them they belong with the republican. Repeat a lie enough times and eventually people will believe it. No one wanted them any more, so convince them and everyone else they have a new home with the people who fought against them from the very beginning.

            You have to admit it was/is one smart way of getting rid of something you don’t want to claim ownership for any more. You can’t deny the KKK was the military arm of the Democrat party since the end of the Civil War.

            The southern shift is a lie. It’s been proven only ONE member changed sides. That’s a dead horse that won’t ride any more. Let it go.

            How many times Chris does Trump have to disavow David Duke, the KKK and other hate groups before you all believe him? He’s been doing it for the past 17 YEARS. But, you all won’t believe him and you never will. We get it.

            Trump Disavows Racists Over and Over Again – While Media Says Exactly the Opposite:


          • Peggy says:

            Chris, one more thing.

            Today’s KKK membership is estimated to be around 100,000. I wouldn’t consider that a significant addition to the Republican party.

            But, back in the 1920 the Democrat party had around 4 million as members of their base. considering the population growth between then and now they were a huge part of the party and it’s power and base.

            “At its peak in the 1920s, Klan membership exceeded 4 million people nationwide.


          • Chris says:

            Peggy, I can see why the theory that Democrats are such master manipulators that we have convinced white racists to become Republicans and the vast majority of blacks to become Democrats, while at the same time not actually changing anything about our party since the days of Jim Crow would be seductive to you. It just doesn’t stand up to reason.

            My understanding of the Southern realignment is that it refers to the *voters* changing parties, not politicians, as a result of changing tactics. That Nixon employed the “Southern strategy” is a fact; we have the tapes, and the testimony of those who advised him. That white Southerners now overwhelmingly vote Republican when they used to overwhelmingly vote Democrat is a fact. That Republicans are far more likely to glorify the Old South by flying the stars and bars is a fact.

            MLK Jr. himself watched the Southern strategy happen and condemned the Republican Party for embracing racism. Those were his words. The Democrats are just that clever and sinister that they convinced MLK Jr. that Republicans were becoming tolerant of racism? He couldn’t possibly have come to this conclusion himself?

  3. Chris says:

    Tearing down statues of traitors doesn’t rewrite history, though. I didn’t learn about Robert E. Lee or the Civil War from a statue.

    Should Germany have kept up statues of Hitler after WWII? Did tearing them down mean Germans could no longer learn about the Nazis?

    Statues are built to honor people, not just to educate. The Confederacy, despite popular myth, did not fight for an honorable cause. They were a treasonous movement whose primary goal was, according to their own statements, the preservation of slavery and the supremacy of the white race. This is stated in every single article of secession, as well as speeches from the Confederacy’s vice president. The statues should not be destroyed, but moved to a museum where they can serve their purpose as education rather than glorifying the old South.

    • Tina says:

      “I didn’t learn about Robert E. Lee or the Civil War from a statue. ”

      I doubt if you ever learned the more complete history conveyed by Jack about Lee, either. One things for sure if the statues are removed, and the history is bent enough in our schools, as it has been for about thirty to forty years, future generations won’t know the truth and won’t have the opportunity to ask. Your own biased (bordering on bigoted) view demonstrates clearly how little you know about American history.

      You sound more like an activist for the militant race movement than a teacher.

      Museums are good but the people (all of them) of the individual states should decide what’s appropriate.

      The Old South was more than slavery. It’s history should not be viewed through the limited racial lens that obsesses race activists.

      Perhaps if the whole history were being taught people would learn to appreciate the South and it’s history more.

      Neither history, nor reality, can change the resentment and anger so prevalent in race activists. That attitude is taught and nurtured, just as racism once was in the South. Both are deplorable and divisive. Neither is something I appreciate or want for America.

      • Chris says:

        There are plenty of wonderful things about the old South. The Confederacy was not one of them. Teach about it, of course. But honoring the Confederacy is not patriotic.

  4. Peggy says:

    I find it disturbing that Democrats are obsessed with rewriting our history. Young adults and today’s students are being taught lies to promote a parties political agenda. Few know the true meaning and intent of the 3/5 clause was to prevent slavery from ever being allowed again by a southern controlled Democrat Congress.

    Remember when Obama’s staff went into the WH website and rewrote the history of past presidents? If we’re going to do the equivalent of burning books and destroying monuments lies will replace truth and our real history will be lost forever.

    How’s this for a legacy?

    Unreal: White House Inserts Obama Into Previous Presidents’ Official Biographies:

    “The Heritage Foundation’s Rory Cooper tweeted that Obama had casually dropped his own name into Ronald Reagan’s official biography on, claiming credit for taking up the mantle of Reagan’s tax reform advocacy with his “Buffett Rule” gimmick. My first thought was, he must be joking. But he wasn’t—it turns out Obama has added bullet points bragging about his own accomplishments to the biographical sketches of every single U.S. president since Calvin Coolidge (except, for some reason, Gerald Ford).

    On Feb. 22, 1924 Calvin Coolidge became the first president to make a public radio address to the American people. President Coolidge later helped create the Federal Radio Commission, which has now evolved to become the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). President Obama became the first president to hold virtual gatherings and town halls using Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.

    On August 14, 1935, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. Today the Obama administration continues to protect seniors and ensure Social Security will be there for future generations.

    In a June 28, 1985 speech Reagan called for a fairer tax code, one where a multi-millionaire did not have a lower tax rate than his secretary. Today, President Obama is calling for the same with the Buffett Rule.”

    I’ve been to the war memorials on the battlefields of Europe and they are a great way of preserving history. I would rather the statues be moved to a museum instead of destroying them, I hope the local communities can afford to move and house them before our history is lost forever.

    We do have similar war memorial locations in the US, like Gettysburg. Hopefully, they won’t become targets of hate and destroyed in the future.

    History is supposed to be a learning tool to prevent the same mistakes in the future. If we have no history what will our future be? Slavery? Or is it already here with gov’t housing projects and welfare replacing plantations?

  5. Libby says:

    Poor Tina. If the statues, and Trump, validate the position of hateful racists, they is coming down. For the Confederacy to be documented in the history books is entirely correct. To be venerated in public monuments? … that was always wrong, and it’s high time (and Trump inspired) that the situation was dealt with.

    That god-awful excuse for a human being may be good for something after all.

  6. Tina says:

    Poor Libby…such a shallow view of history, not to mention an unrealistic bigotry toward Trump, who clearly condemned violence of any kind from any person or group and bravely stood, even in the face of hysteria, for equality and justice in the process!!!!!!

    You ignorant fools think this is fun now…later it might not be so wonderful. This kind of lawlessness, bigotry, hate, and tyranny will not end with statues and flags. When will it be too much for you, Libby? How many innocent people being murdered is enough for you? How many towns burnt to the ground will be too much? Are you up for book burning and silencing speech. Will imprisoning people for speech be too much for you?

    If you lefties don’t get begin to acknowledge the violent extreme left agitators and radicals for what they are and condemn them it will eventually be hung around YOUR neck!

    • Libby says:

      Hysterical? Listen to yourself.

      You know, last week, I was imprisoned with a cable TV for six solid hours. I had no idea it had gotten this bad. Get some Ativan, cut the cable, and visit your grandchildren.

      • Tina says:

        The control freak strikes again! And with that oh so superior condescending tone too.

        You always avoid simple straight forward questions with an attack. But your silence reveals plenty…your position is indefensible so I need an ativan.

    • Peggy says:

      Libby won’t be happy until the Confederate soldiers buried in Arlington Cemetery are dug up and tossed into the garbage dump.

      Check out the huge Arlington Confederate memorial pictured in the below link. Will it be vandalized like Lincoln’s was last night, removed or will people come to their senses first?

      Confederate Memorial
      The history of Arlington National Cemetery is steeped in the Civil War, for it was this great national struggle that necessitated the establishment of this cemetery to bury its many dead. For many years following the war, the bitter feelings between North and South remained, and although hundreds of Confederate soldiers were buried at Arlington, it was considered a Union cemetery. Family members of Confederate soldiers were denied permission to decorate their loved ones’ graves and in extreme cases were even denied entrance to the cemetery.

      These ill feelings were slow to die but over time they did begin to fade. Many historians believe it was the national call to arms during the Spanish-American War that brought northerners and southerners together at last. In that war numerous Confederate veterans volunteered their services and joined their Northern brothers on the battlefield in the common defense of our nation. In June 1900, in this spirit of national reconciliation, the U.S. Congress authorized that a section of Arlington National Cemetery be set aside for the burial of Confederate dead.

      By the end of 1901 all the Confederate soldiers buried in the national cemeteries at Alexandria, Virginia, and at the Soldiers’ Home in Washington were brought together with the soldiers buried at Arlington and reinterred in the Confederate section. Among the 482 persons buried there are 46 officers, 351 enlisted men, 58 wives, 15 southern civilians, and 12 unknowns. They are buried in concentric circles around the Confederate Monument, and their graves are marked with headstones that are distinct for their pointed tops. Legend attributes these pointed-top tombstones to a Confederate belief that the points would “keep Yankees from sitting on them.”

      • Tina says:

        Worth repeating:

        The revisionist history now being peddled by the left wing media and their non-thinking acolytes lacks a factual basis, historical context and a true understanding of history. The Civil War was the climax of decades of tension between the North and the South over states’ rights, economic policies, slavery, and a myriad of other complex issues. Examined within the context of generational theory, it was a Fourth Turning that was unavoidable. It was a crucial important event in U.S. history. It wasn’t the shameful episode portrayed by the brain dead faux journalists babbling on CNN and MSNBC.

        Illegally pulling down statues of Confederate soldiers and taking videos of “brave” unemployed liberal arts major social justice warriors kicking the Confederate soldier is what passes for activism in today’s warped society. Liberal mayors and city councils across the south are falling all over themselves wasting time and taxpayer money to remove statues of Confederate generals to appease the left and make a display of how anti-racist they can be. Meanwhile, their cities are bankrupt, their infrastructure is decaying, black crime is rampant and their education systems matriculate functionally illiterate deranged snowflakes into society.

        Thanks for sharing this excellent article RHT447.

    • J. Soden says:

      Well said, Tina!
      Whether certain groups or individuals like it or not, History serves a purpose to teach what succeeds and what fails.
      Those who seek to revise or destroy History are doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

      • Tina says:

        Thanks, J.

        This is even more profound that a repeat of civil rights era violence. This is destruction of history as a means of ending America and our Constitution.

        Let’s hope it’s a fatal last gasp for the destructive, fundamentally transforming radical left…and, out of the ashes, the rebirth of the ideals of the founders!

      • Libby says:

        You guys are not getting it (small surprise). You and your President are making wildly false equivalencies which will not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

        History is the recording of atrocity … not the veneration thereof. If you persist in insisting upon the veneration, then you support the atrocity, which is a shame.

        Confederate memorials were and are put up by people who venerate the slave-holding way of life, and these “memorials”, aka offenses to common decency, should all be removed.

        • J. Soden says:

          History is the recording of atrocity??????????
          Only the Loony Left would think so and ignore the positives.
          Sorry, Libby. You get an F for this one.

        • Chris says:


          “Confederate memorials were and are put up by people who venerate the slave-holding way of life, and these “memorials”, aka offenses to common decency, should all be removed.”

          I’m quoting this for truth. There were two major periods when Confederate monuments were put up: the early 1900s when Jim Crow began, and the 1950s during the Civil Rights Era. This was not a coincidence.

          Trump did condemn violence on both sides, however, many conservatives agreed that he was too soft on the alt-right and that his statements helped legitimize them. This is unsurprising, as one of his closest advisers, Steve Bannon, bragged about making Breitbart a platform for the alt-right. Anyone who has ever read the comments at Breitbart knows it is a cesspool of racism, anti-Semitism and misogyny, and the moderators do nothing to curb or discourage this.

          David French is a writer for the National Review who has been viciously harassed and threatened by the alt-right for his criticism of Trump and for having a multi-racial family. He believes that Trump’s comments helped enable the alt-right, and shows evidence that the alt-right is celebrating Trump’s speech:

          • Libby says:

            And now Bannon has been caught out calling them “clowns”. He and Trump are both making use of these mental defectives. It’s a damned shame.

        • Tina says:

          “Confederate memorials were and are put up by people who venerate the slave-holding way of life…”

          You’re welcome to your OPINION, however there is no way you know the reasons or intentions in anyone’s mind. But thank you for demonstrating the exact kind of bigotry that makes the entire meme that “republicans are racist” (or Southerners are racist) ridiculous!

          You and your party were historically the ones connected to the KKK, rejected civil rights legislation, hosed people down in the streets, and were blatant flaming racists! When the worm turned you saw the writing on the wall and shifted from hatred and bigotry to using the black man for VOTES! They’ve been voting Democrat and against their individual rights ever since…you’ve exploited and bought them off with promises of free stuff. But even in Democrat controlled cities their kids still get a lousy education and have to hang out in dangerous neighborhoods. You kill their opportunities with all that socialist BS. Disgusting!

          And now you are out in the streets, with paid for agitators, trying to pin that ugly label on Trump and his supporters and why? Because your party is dying and has no good ideas. Your ideas are old, they’ve created massive federal and state debt, they’ve brought us a nation without adequate jobs and an ever more elitist wealthy class.


          • Chris says:

            “You and your party were historically the ones connected to the KKK, rejected civil rights legislation, hosed people down in the streets, and were blatant flaming racists! ”

            Yes, the key word there is “were.”

            The people who *are* connected to the KKK *now* are not Democrats, and did not support the Democrat candidate. They are very vocal in their support of Donald Trump. That does not mean that Trump supports them in return, and it doesn’t make any labeling of all of his supporters fair. But the National Review is right; he isn’t doing a very good job of denouncing them. And the Nazis themselves agree.

  7. Tina says:

    Chris: “Trump did condemn violence on both sides, however, many conservatives agreed that he was too soft on the alt-right and that his statements helped legitimize them.”

    Cowardly conservatives every one!

    It was the media hammering that “too soft” message…it was not Trumps message! Republicans are worried about their own skin in the next election. It is part of the left’s plan to build justification for impeachment and they won’t mind doing it on hyped up fake news and a pack of lies…it’s the Alinsky way!!! “pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. – Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.”

    Why has your party never been asked to disavow “Rules for Radicals,” and it’s author Saul Alinsky. why have they not been asked to disavow George Soros?

    The left activist media has been gunning for Trump since the beginning…and so have many elitist Republicans in Congress. Given that atmosphere I imagine every time he’s asked a question he’s on edge. And it’s not that hard to be misunderstood in this politically correct atmosphere. I don’t think it would matter what he said they would find some way to create a negative issue.

    Trump has been asked this before…left media people didn’t bother to “Google.”


    In 2000, Trump told NBC’s “Today” that he wouldn’t seek the Reform Party nomination because he said the party was “self-destructing.”

    Matt LAUER: “When you say the party is self-destructing, what do you see as the biggest problem with the Reform Party right now?”

    Trump: “Well, you’ve got David Duke just joined – a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party.”

    The New York Times also reported at the time that Trump issued a news release referring to Duke as “a Klansman” and not the “company I wish to keep.”

    Trump also spoke out against Duke in 1991 – three days after Duke lost a race for governor in Louisiana.

    CNN’s Larry KING: “Did the David Duke thing bother you? Fifty-five percent of the whites in Louisiana voted for him.” (How many were democrats?)

    Trump: “I hate seeing what it represents, but I guess it just shows there’s a lot of hostility in this country. There’s a tremendous amount of hostility in the United States.”

    In America we once had the freedom to have opinions and express them without being completely ostracized (live and let live) and we were willing to defend the right, even for people we found despicable. Today, in your Orwellian PC climate that’s no longer true. These alt-right groups DO NOT have broad acceptance or approval on the right. The media is attempting to make it seem that anyone who backs Trump is a friend of Duke. A complete lie.

    Trump is attempting to lead in this incredibly hostile environment. It’s not the atmosphere I want in my country but here we are…and apparently it’s okay with you.

    Question. Why are the leaders of the Democrat Party not badgered when Trump supporters or conservative speakers are violently attacked by groups associated with the Democrat Party?

    If Trump can be excoriated for not disavowing strongly enough or in the “right” way, why are leaders of your party not badgered to disavow BLM when they scream “pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon” and “what do we want…dead cops…when do we want em…now?” Or when the cops in Dallas were murdered? Or when other police officers, taking the cue from the invented Ferguson shooting, were murdered as they sat in their cruisers? Why were they not challenged again and again to justify their alliance with New Black Panthers in Ferguson when they rioted and burned down businesses and when a “wanted dead or alive” poster was posted?

    Does the media ever accuse anyone on the left of not saying enough to denounce the many violent and militant groups that support the Democrat Party? No, Chris, it does not. There is a double standard. There is a concerted, partisan effort in the media to bring down this president and deeply harm the Republican party. Why? Not because they have better ideas but because their ideas are being rejected and your party is losing. The radical left always turns to violence when they are losing. In the process this time they are creating violence and at the same time projecting that onto the opposition.

    After the corruption we’ve witnessed in your party over the last eight years I would think just the opposite would be happening from a legitimate media. The fact that it isn’t should give you pause.

    This is just another moment in a long string of moments that are a complete disgrace. You’re a smart guy Chris, and unlike Libby, not a died in the wool communist.

    I agree Trump has a problem in his communications. But it is also completely true that he is operating in a completely hostile environment and the people that voted for the things he ran on, the people counting on relief in the jobs market and with healthcare, the people who’s kids are not getting a good education or are living in dangerous neighborhoods, are the ones paying the price.

    Trump isn’t being given the opportunity to do his job.

    When I think of how the fawning press behaved when Obama was first elected it makes me physically ill.


    And after the corruption, the blatant disregard for the law, the overt anti-white presence, why haven’t you disavowed the Democrat Party as a corrupted, violent, racist party?

    • Libby says:

      “I agree Trump has a problem in his communications.”

      But you are still insisting that we proceed upon what YOU THINK Trump means, and not what he actually says (which is, in fact, very little).

      That is nuts, and it’s not gonna happen. The man is unfit for the office, and he is gonna have to go.

      • Tina says:

        “But you are still insisting that we proceed upon what YOU THINK Trump means, and not what he actually says…”

        It’s the exact opposite! He absolutely disavowed violence by anyone and when that wasn’t enough he named the groups…that still wasn’t enough because he had the tenacity to also call out the thugs who came wielding clubs to start a fight. It wasn’t okay to point out the TRUTH for Gods sake…the TRUTH!!

        They also didn’t like the fact that he said there were some nice people there also…they DECIDED he meant nice David Duke lovers when it’s more than possible that he meant there were people who had just come to watch without an agenda or affiliation.

        Obama was NEVER treated this way…even through the corruption and failures. Double standard!

        And the last word has not been spoken about the corruption and failures of his administration either.

        “The man” is fit for office…the people have spoken. The fact that you don’t like him, his methods for communicating, or his agenda is not sufficient cause for him to go…it’s just sour grapes and fear that your precious socialist big government agenda could be taken down a peg or two. Such arrogance!

        • Libby says:

          “It’s the exact opposite!”

          But Tina, the next day he took it all back … and the day after that as well.

          Mr. Romney heard what I heard … and nailed The Trump’s slats to the barn door this morning, rhetorically speaking. The MSM is awash in editorial assertions that The Trump Presidency is essentially over … unless the The Trump evolves into a decent, or even just intelligent, human being over the weekend. Long odds on that.

    • Chris says:

      David French is a coward? Read about what he and his family have gone through because of his criticism of Trump and then call him a coward again.

      Trump is not even a conservative. That you side with him over the real conservatives at National Review says everything. I agree with them on many principles, but at least they *have* principles.

      • Tina says:

        Did I name names?


        David French, by the way, claimed (key word) that Donald Trump supporters harassed his family members but he had no proof:

        …the Iraq War veteran told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that members of his wife’s family were personally accosted by Trump supporters over the phone, while racist trolls on the internet have disparagingly insulted his adopted Ethiopian daughter.

        French, who is also a lawyer, (meaning what?) explained that Trump supporters were asked by the Trump campaign to call his wife’s family in Tennessee and tell them to tell him that things would “be bad” for him if he decided to run for president.

        “Well, you know, it was probably one of the more ham-handed attempts at intimidation, which out of the Trump operation you can expect things to be done in the most incompetent way possible,” French asserted. “An individual calls [and] he says, ‘I’m sorry, but I’ve been asked by the Trump campaign to make sure that David knows this will be really, really bad for him.'”

        French added that he did not know about the call until after he had already decided that he would not run for president.

        As a “lawyer” he should know better than to make such a sspecious accusation! There is no way to identify a person on the phone or the internet as a Trump supporter or campaign person. But he’s convinced that Trumps supporters are racists so he makes the assumption that Trump supporters made the call. Anyone could have done this! It could have been Hillary supporters or Bernie supporters. It might not have happened at all.

        David French was Bill Krostol’s guy for president and Bill Kristol has been against Trump (viciously, by the way) from the start…he apparently spends his days and nights on twitter trying to undermine Trump to this day.

        And if he’s going to spend his days writing rotten things about Trump he should expect some blow back from Trump supporters….and maybe even people posing as Trump supporters

        You people on the left that think you can hurl insults and make specious accusations about people without being challenged and met insult for insult crack me up. Is it that arrogance thing or just the notion that there’s only one way to look at things? (Your way)

        “That you side with him over the real conservatives at National Review says everything.”

        Like what? (not a rhetorical question)

        Trump was not my first choice, as you know. And as I said after he won, he got my vote because the alternative was JUST THAT BAD!!!

        I am in favor of the major things he wants to do to create jobs and a stronger economy, I’ve seen them work before. I am in favor of his law and order agenda. I am in favor of his adult willingness to hold the leaders in the world to their obligations and to confront them when they are being irresponsible and aggressive. I’m behind his fair trade goals. I am four square behind his agenda to protect our borders and support our military and policing forces. I am behind his agenda to repeal and replace Obamacare and give power back to the people and their doctors…and I am extremely disappointed so far in what the Republican congress has failed to do after eight years of promises. (Democrat are acting as expected even in the face of their failing program…no help for the people suffering from un-affordable coverage, coverage they don’t want, and fines/taxes they must pay for rejecting what they don’t want, or doctors spending more hours doing busy work instead of productively with patients)

        Don’t try to lecture me on “principles,” Chris, unless you have something valid to say; this hasn’t been that.

        You have yet to admit to the failures and corruption in the Obama administration and the damage it has done in our nation or the militant violent radicals that are regularly embraced by your party.

        • Chris says:

          “You people on the left that think you can hurl insults and make specious accusations about people without being challenged and met insult for insult crack me up.”

          So now David French is on “the left.”

          This is a sickness, Tina. You are on the wrong side of this. The contingent that will support Trump no matter what will hopefully be regarded by the rest of the right as akin to the John Birch Society when Trump goes under.

          At least, I hope. The alternative is that the alt-right takes over the party.

  8. Peggy says:

    Tina, a couple of thoughts to your comment.

    You asked, “Why are the leaders of the Democrat Party not badgered when Trump supporters or conservative speakers are violently attacked by groups associated with the Democrat Party?”

    Answer is, because many of those group’s leaders were invited by Obama to the WH, where family members of the media worked. Democrats and the media are on the same team. Republicans are the opponents.

    You wrote, “The radical left always turns to violence when they are losing. In the process this time they are creating violence and at the same time projecting that onto the opposition.”

    My response. Democrats are doing what they’ve always done. Go back to the roots of the hatred this nation has been dealing with for over 200 years and it leads to the KKK, the military arm of the Democrat party. And just like they’ve done since then they are trying to cover up their hateful ways by blaming the Republicans. This time they have the liberal media helping them. But, they have come up against a president who is standing up to them and pointing out the media’s and leader’s lies as fake news. His fighting back is just making them madder and more vicious. They’re not used to having to defend themselves and god forbid retract and correct their phony articles. Trump is making them do it.

    Also, what Democrats and the media do not realize is all of this hate and attacks on Trump is turning people who held their noses and voted for Trump or did so to vote against Hillary into strong supporters.

    Listening and reading what conservatives are saying should have Democrats rethinking their attacks on Trump, because an army of Trump supporters are getting on that train of his.

    It’s becoming very clear the reason many of his campaign promises are not getting through congress because of the Democrat’s dragging the approval process for his appointees out, leaving vital positions and support staff vacant and the work not getting done. Working people realize how the work environment operates. Blue or white collar, the work can’t get done without the right people to do it.

    ObamaCare and tax reform had better get done before Thanksgiving or establishment members of both parties reelection are in trouble. Thanks to the social media we’ve learned the backroom deals of McConnell, Ryan, Pelosi and Schumar. It’s play along for the pay needed to fight off opponents. Except, Hillary lost to Trump after spending many millions more than he did. The Alabama run off election between McConnell backed Strange and conservative backed Moore will be a good indication for the 2018 election and Trump’s chances in 2020.

    Anyway, thems my thoughts. People are really waking up to the truth. Well, many are except those with blinders on. Libby’s comment cracked me up.

    • Tina says:

      Answer is, because many of those group’s leaders were invited by Obama to the WH, where family members of the media worked. Democrats and the media are on the same team. Republicans are the opponents.

      Peggy I love ya…you’re right about that!

      But the question wasn’t meant for you and it really isn’t a question, it’s an accusation in search of an answer from the liberals. I put it in the form of a question for Chris and Libby because they do need to explain themselves and their party…they need to cop to the double standard as well. It’s a version of Alinsky’s Rule #4 “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If their rule is harass and demean then they probably need to get some of that thrown back in their faces…If the rule is tolerance then they need to be called on their intolerance and bigotry.

      I wish it were different but they made the rules and I’m done being kind to such nasty intolerant lying game players. They are such phonies.

      Enjoyed the remainder of your thoughts. I find it interesting that the two parties DNC/RNC are not running as usual in terms of small donor contributions. The RNC is raking in the small donor doe (better indicator of the vote)…DNC, not so much:

      Thursday, August 3, 2017

      The Republican president has a job approval rating around 40 percent. The GOP has an unfavorability rating around 56 percent. And Republicans trail Democrats by nine points in an average of “generic ballot” polls.

      All of which makes it notable that the Republican National Committee is trouncing the Democratic National Committee when it comes to raising money, especially from small donors.

      The numbers are striking. In June, the RNC raised $13.5 million to the DNC’s $5.5 million.

      For 2017 so far, the RNC has raised $75.4 million to the DNC’s $38.2 million.

      As of June 30, the RNC reported $0 in debt. The DNC reported $3.3 million in debt.

      There is much discussion about the intensity of Democratic opposition to President Donald Trump, and indeed Democrats showed a lot of fundraising enthusiasm in the losing Georgia congressional race that turned into a referendum on the president. But the fact is, the passions behind The Resistance have not, or have not yet, turned into support for the main vehicle of opposition to Trump, the Democratic Party.

      A look inside the numbers is even worse for the DNC. Looking at collections from small donors — that is, those who contributed less than $200 — the RNC raised $10.5 million in the months of May and June. The DNC raised $5.3 million from small donors in the same time period.

      The RNC’s money total is a record — more than was raised in any previous non-presidential election year. That is true for June, and for all of 2017 as well. The $75.4 million raised this year compares to $55.4 million for the same period in 2015.

      “It’s definitely a reflection of support for President Trump,” said RNC spokesman Ryan Mahoney. “Our small-dollar donors are giving at a record pace because they believe the RNC is supporting President Trump, and they like that.”

      Congressional Republicans had better wise up, stick together, and push forward the agenda the American people want and need…we’re firmly behind that..and counting on them.

    • Libby says:

      Poor Peggy. The Democrats in Congress are, right now, doing not much more than sitting back and enjoying the show.

      But if fantasies of malevolent machinating make you feel better … you just go ahead on.

      As to legislative progress, you can forget all about that until the Distractor-in-Chief has had his thumbs amputated … or maybe when Mr. “Local Milk People” (and that is classic Alzheimers, by the way), has been pastured.

      Me having way too much fun.

  9. Peggy says:

    I knew your question was meant for Chris and Libs. I just couldn’t resist jumping in with my 2 cents worth. Noticed neither have responded.

    It’s amazing the double standard they’ll deny like a wart on their noses looking into a mirror. The leaders of BLM, etc. got invites from Obama to the WH, but god forbid Trump didn’t denounce the KKK a hundred more times when there are already a dozen or more videos of him saying it dating back 17 years.

    The RNC and DNC funding is a whole other story. The DNC is in big trouble from what I hear and not just from their funds being down. Big news could be coming out soon, tick tock tick tock, about their emails.

    And the RNC will take a hit when more people realize how McConnell is picking and choosing candidates who will be his lap dog. Trump has announced his support for AZ senator Jeff Flake’s opponent Kelli Ward. Expect McConnel will dump millions for Flake like he did for Strange in Alabama. Trump supporters are not going to give money that will go towards a candidate who doesn’t support Trump. Instead they’ll give to a PAC that does.

    I haven’t given a dime to RNC or CRP in years, but have to conservative PACs that support the candidates I like. I also don’t give to any PAC run by Carl Rove either.

    I don’t think I’m alone in this either. People are waking up and fighting back with their voices and their pockets. We will get our gov’t back, because democrat and establishment republican in control of Congress and the WH is not acceptable if my grandkids are not going to be forced to live in a socialist/communist state.

  10. Tina says:

    Chris: “Yes, the key word there is “were.”

    That may be true for most who still call themselves Democrats but it doesn’t excuse the blatant labeling of the party of Lincoln as “racist.’ This has been going on since before you were born and it is an absolute lie. Labeling the Tea Party racist was a lie. The media goes along with these labels even when they are tagged onto people that have legally defended blacks in court and hired them to work in their offices and promoted them to extraordinary positions.

    If the Democrats had not tried to use race as a political tool this issue would not be going on and the radical groups that Americans condemned and rejected years ago would still be hiding out in their Nazi, KKK caves. Thousands of minorities who have been taught that white people on the right hate them would not have that as part of their experience.

    This is a serious, egregiously irresponsible thing to do politically. A tactic that is as despicable as forming the KKK in the first place. And by my “principles” your party should be roundly rejected. Given that and the corruption there’s quite a bit of evidence that it is being rejected too.

  11. Tina says:

    Mike Sabo of American Greatness responds to remarks made by David French at National Review (and others):

    Luminaries such as David French, Erick Erickson, and Ben Shapiro took the field against Trump, trying to prove the Leftist narrative that he sympathizes with white supremacists. One example of the kind of “logic” contained in these pieces should suffice.

    In his National Review column, French called for the firing not of Terry McAuliffe, the rabid partisan governor of Virginia, nor of Michael Signer, the feckless Charlottesville mayor who failed to keep order while radicals clashed in the streets. Instead, French argued that Steve Bannon, President Trump’s chief strategist, should be sacrificed to the liberal gods of tolerance and diversity. …

    … John Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary, offered his usual principled and moderate take: “Bannon did what he came to do: He made Trump side with Nazis. His job is done.” (Twitter)

    Podhoretz’s calumny is typical among this lot. They regularly talk a good game about principles and virtue, but their words and actions constantly devolve to the lowest common denominator. Why would Bannon, whom Podhoretz equates with Nazis, call white supremacists and their fellow travelers a “fringe element” of “clowns” and “losers” who society must “crush” if Podhoretz had even the smallest point? Podhoretz, no doubt, will still hear dog whistles to Richard Spencer in this clear condemnation. Perhaps the decibels were not amped up enough for him in that interview?

    Some people are simply beyond help at this point. For the base of Trump supporters, Bannon is the avatar of the Trump agenda, which is based on securing the people’s interests rather than upholding the interests of the members of the Beltway Uniparty faction. That the conservative elites, whose foolishness knows no bounds, are applauding his exit speaks volumes. …

    These are men I have admired and read and will continue to read. But they have either bought the leftist Alinsky smear (of very decent people – I’m one of them by association) or they are so afraid of being smeared themselves they flinch, they play it safe (it is their livelihood), making them cowards of a sort.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.