Sorry, Dem Fascists of College Programmed Variety….The Female Human Animal IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THE EQUAL OF THE HUMAN MALE!

I, Glenn Herbert Ray,  was born in 1934….a depression child with an older sister.  I was school raised in World War time  by strict, well educated, God fearing, very American elderly old maid Christians, kindergarten through sixth grade…..40 kids per class.

I was born curious to a fault and dyslexic, a disorder neither invented nor understood until I was married with children.   My Mother was from  German background and loved my Dad more than anything in the world.   My dad, who loved his wife more than anything in the world, was a farm boy from Hope, North Dakota, whose father, Frank Ray,  left Cherryfield, Maine in 1876 at age 17.  His well-to-do  Maine family  practiced primogeniture, that is, the law that the first born male would receive the family’s wealth upon the death of the father.     My grandfather, Frank,  was the youngest of three boys.   He had bought homestead land somewhere west of Fargo,  North Dakota.  And so he left Maine alone on horseback.    I have a postcard with a picture of him standing next to his horse.  He had  sent it to his mother back in Maine from Chillicothe, Ohio on his way West.  “Mother, I am fine, Frank.”

Four years or so later, he met my grandmother-to-be, Anna Williams,  whose family was trekking with all of their kin and possessions to settle just west of the Sheyenne River, not far from Hope.   Their wagons got stuck while they were trying to cross the river.   It  happened Grandfather Frank and friends were meant to show up at the right time  to solve the problem.  He and Anna were married about three years later…and bore five children.   Two boys served in World War I.  Two younger boys   stayed home to farm.

I never met my Grandfather Ray.  He died of throat cancer in 1917.   His wife however, at 4’11” and 98 pounds, whom I dearly loved,   became ruling queen of all of our  Rays  until she died of a stroke in 1947 at age, 80.     Three of the four boys, one of them my dad,  were very close brothers.

My Mother’s kin were hard working farmers, builders,  and carpenters, some with German accents,  who had settled in the German “west side” of St. Paul.   These were churched folks of the German-Lutheran variety, as was my mom.   We all went to Church…..or else….but the “Or Else” was a joy for me and my curiosity drive.

I loved my old maid school teachers whether the church variety or those at school.   They were so dedicated, so  well educated.   Once, after school when I was in 3rd grade  in early fall,  I sneaked into the school milk room after school so in privacy I could  go to  my third grade teacher, Mrs. Lucille Jaeger, and ask her:

“Mrs. Jaeger.   How  did you get to learn so much?”    She showed me her own  National Geographics….the late 1920 to 1942 variety, filled with pictures of people at home and abroad, animals, maps with cutlines I could read without trouble.   “Stop by any time after school you want”, she told me….   And so I did until real winter arrived.

They governed student behavior making learning the high light throughout the day.  Every kid had a dad at work, and a mom at home.   I never heard a swear word of any kind until I was in public high school in Spring, 1947, my freshman year when a new boy in school, David Martin  rather loudly used the word “damn” as we boys were going outside for gym class.   Gym instructor, Mr. Colin Kelly apparently heard the word as well as I did.   David Martin disappeared from school for the rest of the week, as I recall.

Human males in my boyhood experience in the city where I lived, were expected to become men, fathers, workers,  problem solvers, protectors,  earners, knowledgeable, reliable, honest and Christian setting examples like my Dad.  Some had to go to War.  Fathers in our neighborhood worked six days a week.   Sunday was for Church and family.

Human females in my boyhood were exceptionally respected.   Moms set the rules of the day.    They were or were to be Mothers,  to be home in charge of  house, garden,   and children.   It was in the 1960s the Grave New World of public vulgarity and Godlessness  began to reek its stench.

Our American culture as been sliding  downhill  ever since the Reagan Age……except…..except maybe, ironically, almost unbelievably, UNTIL TODAY’S ARRIVAL OF A  NEW AMERICAN ERA OF SALVATION LED BY OUR PRESENT  PRESIDENT, DONALD J. TRUMP!

Are we conservatives good enough, wise enough, determined enough, tolerant enough, JudeoChristian enough, family oriented enough, and in love of Our America enough to back and guide the President to rally the country to save the nation from Socialism’s poisons and ditsies?

Minnesota Temperature Extremes Recorded, in case you didn’t know!

JanuaryHighest Temperature69 °F (21 °C)January 24, 1981MontevideoLowest Temperature−57 °F (−49 °C)January 20, 1996Embarrass

FebruaryHighest Temperature76 °F (24 °C)February 26, 1896Pleasant MoundLowest Temperature−60 °F (−51 °C)February 2, 1996Tower

MarchHighest Temperature88 °F (31 °C)March 23, 1910MontevideoLowest Temperature−50 °F (−46 °C)March 2, 1897Pine City

AprilHighest Temperature101 °F (38 °C)April 22, 1980HawleyLowest Temperature−22 °F (−30 °C)April 6, 1979Karlstad

MayHighest Temperature112 °F (44 °C)May 31, 1934Maple PlainLowest Temperature4 °F (−16 °C)May 1, 1909
May 2, 1909Pine River

JuneHighest Temperature110 °F (43 °C)June 29, 1931CanbyLowest Temperature15 °F (−9 °C)June 1, 1964Bigfork

JulyHighest Temperature114 °F (46 °C)July 29, 1917 July 6, 1936Beardsley
MoorheadLowest Temperature24 °F (−4 °C)July 7, 1997Tower

AugustHighest Temperature110 °F (43 °C)August 10, 1947
August 1, 1988 Beardsley  MontevideoLowest Temperature21 °F (−6 °C)August 28, 1996
August 2, 2002 Tower
Kelliher

SeptemberHighest Temperature111 °F (44 °C)September 11, 1931Beardsley Lowest Temperature10 °F (−12 °C)September 30, 1930
September 22, 1974Big Falls  

OctoberHighest Temperature98 °F (37 °C)October 5, 1963BeardsleyLowest Temperature−16 °F (−27 °C)October 26, 1936Roseau

NovemberHighest Temperature84 °F (29 °C)November 1, 1950WinonaLowest Temperature−45 °F (−43 °C)November 30, 1896Pine City

DecemberHighest Temperature74 °F (23 °C)December 9, 1939WheatonLowest Temperature−57 °F (−49 °C)December 31, 1898Pine City

But, Canada Is Already A Fascistic, One Party Government, Education, Communications, & Political World

…..and one of its neighbors across its southern border,  Minnesota,  isn’t too far behind..

Dennis Prager doesn’t live very close to fascistic Canada.  He’s lucky.   He’s got Oregon sitting north of his fascistic home state, California and Washington state “polarwise” beyond that.   It’s still woodsy and mountainous there in BC.

Canadians have British Columbia as their California:   one of their leading fascistic provinces  dictating  wrong from right,  night from day,  fascism from freedom.   Unlike Manitoba, it’s an up-to-date province from the leftist prospective throughout our continent.

Dennis turned to British Columbia for a while  during his radio show this Friday morning.  (British Columbia is that large Pacific Coast Province of Canada that politically behaves a lot like fascistic Seattle, Washington, only leftier, apparently.)

A 14 year old girl wanted to be a boy, because she “felt” like it.   She apparently challenged, or had a lawyer  challenge her parents who had shamed her with a girl’s name, because the body of the little being was a girl’s body fourteen years ago……and has remained so for all of these years.  The Girl-boy, or Boy-girl won her case, because the screwball leftist Judge said so.   He warned that her  parents better pay attention to their 14 year old’s feelings or pay a hefty price for not doing as the STATE DICTATES!

More than that, the Judge lawed down the rule that the parents of the parents of the  boy-girl  would be committing a British Columbia crime if they didn’t refer to  her with  a male name as their “child” had demanded.  (Perhaps something  very butch “Tarzan” perhaps?)

The CBC is a  programmed fascistic-left feminized gang of intellectual thieves of all lefty ranges who spread their FEELINGS to their public…. all somewhat soprano  to contralto in their aural thinkings.  After all, the majority of human females really don’t give a damn about TRUTH.   Their FEELINGS DICTATE.    It is NOT in their province to PROBLEM SOLVE!! Why bother….that’s what guys do…. THE HUMAN FEMALE ANIMAL  SEEKS SECURITY whether Nazi, Soviet, or Hillaryites ABOVE ALL….it’s in her “blood”.

(Be sure to review the CBC “report” of the 2016 American Presidential Election.   Could it be that human female animal is born to be LEFTISTS who prefer feelings over reality’s (God’s) Truth?

 

Does the Fascist Left Own the U.S. Political Polling Industry?

Why Does Gallup Hate Reporting Conservatives’ Overwhelming National Majority?

by Bruce Walker  at  American Thinker:By Bruce Walker

…

The latest Gallup Poll on February 22, 2019 has news that ought to be happy for conservatives.  In 43 states, conservatives outnumber liberals and in 6 states — Hawaii, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, and Washington — liberals outnumber conservatives.  California is evenly split.  The title of this article was actually better than most: “Conservatives Greatly Outnumber Liberals in 19 U.S. States.”

Those who have followed my articles over the last ten years know that every single polling organization — and practically all of these are leftist in tilt — show a conservative majority in America, and it has been the same over the last fifty years.  Many conservatives, perversely, find this good news as unlikely as if they were self-deluded leftists, but if the leftist establishment could possibly make the data produce a conservative minority, trust me they would.

Gallup, while it presents the data showing an overwhelming preponderance of conservative strength when the data are looked at on a state-by-state basis, uses the title of its articles announcing the data to downplay the big story.

So when Gallup Poll data in 2009 showed that every single state in America had more conservatives than liberals, surely, that would be the title of the article, but it was not.  Instead, the title of the article with the polling data was this earth-shaking news: “Political Ideology: ‘Conservative’ Label Prevails in the South.”  Wow!  Who would have ever thought that?

In 2010, when Gallup Poll data showed that conservatives outnumbered liberals in every state but Rhode Island, naturally, the title of the article in which Gallup presented this data was “Wyoming, Mississippi and Utah rank as most conservative states.  The District of Columbia and four New England states rank as most liberal.”  Aside from the fact that three of those four New England states had more conservatives than liberals and that the District of Columbia is not a state…

In 2011, when the Gallup Poll data showed that conservatives outnumbered liberals in all of the 50 states, Gallup boldly announced: “Mississippi rates as Most Conservative US State.”  Which title seems to give more information: the one published by Gallup or this: “Conservatives Outnumber Liberals in Every State of the Union”?

In 2013, the Gallup Poll on the ideological composition of states showed that every state except Rhode Island and Massachusetts had more conservatives than liberals.  So, naturally, the title of the Gallup Poll article was: “Alabama, North Dakota, Wyoming Most Conservative States.  Americans slightly less conservative, slightly more liberal.”

In 2016, when Gallup data showed that only four states — New York, Connecticut, Vermont, and Massachusetts — had more liberals than conservatives, the title of the Gallup article was “Wyoming, North Dakota and Mississippi Most Conservative,” which was hardly a shock to anyone.  Gallup, again, chose to ignore a big story for an essentially meaningless title to an article in which the polling data revealed a story the ordinary American would never have suspected.

The bottom line is always the same: polling organizations are simply another arm of the leftist establishment, and they employ whatever is needed to marginalize or minimize conservatism.  That is why all of the polls by all the polling organizations downplay what their own data show.

What is most perverse, though, is how many conservatives scoff  at this data, which, for more than fifty years, in every single poll conducted by many different polling organization, have shown that conservatives greatly outnumber liberals.

The usual response is something like this: “Americans like the goodies they get from Washington and so don’t really know what conservatism means.  The data are meaningless.”  We ought to accept these polls, however, for several different reasons: (1) the polling data stretch back more than half a century and include every poll; (2) these polling organizations are establish leftist, so, if anything, the polling is skewed to find a liberal majority, which it doesn’t; (3) respondents nearly always have the option of “moderate” or “don’t know,” which means that the respondents are specifically selecting conservatism as a choice; (4) conservatism has been demonized during these fifty years, so choosing “conservative” takes courage; and (5) even when conservatism is separated into “social” and “economic” conservatism, the results are the same.

There is no reason, really, to question the fact that, if anything, the conservative advantage is greater than the polling data suggest.  We ought to be happy with the grudgingly given good news in these polls.  When we start seeing ourselves the way the left wants us to be, then we turn victory into defeat.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/02/why_does_gallup_hate_reporting_conservatives_overwhelming_national_majority.html

Fox’s Two Jews and One Gentile Judge the NATION’S FEMINIST FASCIST ASSAULTS ON INNOCENT ROMAN CATHOLIC TEENS!

HERO,  NICHOLAS SANDMANN, AND THE DISAPPEARANCE OF TRUTH IN OUR AMERICA’S NEWS INDUSTRY AND POLITICAL PARTIES!  WHATEVER HAPPENED TO REPORTING TRUTH?  WHATEVER HAPPENED TO SEEKING, TEACHING TRUTH?

Fox News is a foreign business enterprise.  It announces its ‘news’ as “Fair and Balanced”.  If you are an Australian who is not on the fascistic left, “Fair and Balanced” might appear to be a fair title. This Fox and its sister foreigner  FOX BUSINESS network are the only non-leftist national television centers providing “news”  in our coast-to-coast America.   Nearly the entire American education and communication industries today are in  solid  leftist-fascist feminist control.

And then, leading,  governing our American news, communications industries, are today’s Nancy Pelosi’s cult ‘buddies’, Charles Schumer, Carl Bernstein, Andrea Mitchell, Lanny Davis,  Bill Kristol, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN,  MSNBC, David Brooks, Jeff Greenfield, Stanley Greenberg,  Gerry Nadler, Mara Liasson, George Soros,  Bernie Sanders, Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Chris Wallace, Howard Kurtz, Richard Blumenthal, plus yesteryear fascistic feminist friends,  Betty Freidan, Andrea Dworkin, and Gloria Steinem, and today’s  feminist-feminazi industries,  their university  and newsprint empires from coast to coast.

This past week this news industry, its friends, associates, feminists, and many of the fascistics  still living from the above listing,  more specifically the folks at  CNN,  sold their   “FAKE NEWS” by advertising throughout the nation’s television industry, the plight and suffering of, they reported,   a poor,  “innocent”, aged,   struggling, weakened  nonwhite homeless American man of the street,  was humiliated, ridiculed,  by a bunch of threatening white  Roman Catholic teenage hoodlums from Covington, Kentucky many wearing MAGA caps, caps associated with  Americans who dare to  support America’s conservative, JudeoChristian, God-fearing President, Donald J. Trump.

As it turns out this event became a PLOTTED attack upon America’s JudeoChristianity community, especially its Roman Catholics.  It appears it  was created by and  spread  by a  Soviet-like fascistic human animals at leftist television CNN.

In Truth, if any Americans are still interested in  Truth, this assault was an attack staged and reported to sell  fascistic left wing propaganda throughout  the daily  American news industry, including Fox.

These so-called reported  “evil, typical” Roman Catholic teens from Covington, Kentucky were visiting the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. that city  where  our nation’s fascistic Democrats  led by “Schumer and Pelosi” stir and lead countless fascistic falsehoods for the sake of winning elections…..where  Truth has no meaning.

CNN had reported that a MAGA hat wearer, a Roman Catholic 16 year old boy had assaulted, demeaned, insulted, intimidated a crippled, suffering, innocent American near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.

This big national American story began to appear on some news fronts throughout the country late last week.   Yet,  fascistics at CNN had made some quick adjustments to their previous  deceitful reporting selling their leftism.  Not a word was mentioned “Black Evil Israelites”.  Certain CNN reports on the matter began to disappear from a host of news stations last Thursday, I think it was……..and then, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, during  Friday’s CNN’s FASCISTIC NEWS for a FASCIST  AMERICA,  MOTHER TRUTH BEGAN TO REAPPEAR!

Few paid any attention yet to this MAJOR LEFTIST FASCISTIC CNN PLOT.

A poor, pathetic, troubled, colored fellow at the center of CNN’s television DECEIT, turned out to be a troubled pathetic colored fellow who lied, who sadly, as it turned out, was not a war hero, or sadly,  a hero of anything known from the past or present.  He was used by LEFTISTS at CNN….apparently organized…..and a setting enhanced by  thirty or forty foul mouthed leftist gangsters who likely created the event…..perhaps by CNN staff to advance its political power?

(By the way, the JudeoChristian primary tenet of  teaching is based upon seeking Truth,  to learn and detect  the differences  between  ETERNAL CLASSIC GOOD and CLASSIC EVIL’S  DECEIT and UNTRUTH.

ON THIS PAST SUNDAY, REGULAR FOX MORNING NEWS STAR, HOWARD KURTZ REVIEWED THE ABOVE CABAL.   He’s a charming Jewish fellow with a decidedly leftist background.  Starring as fellow commentators in this Kurtz  morning’s  show,  was old- timer, intelligent, civil, fast-talking quite leftist Jewish gal, Mara Liasson.   and some quite gentile conservative guy…..three folks, (two Jews and a gentile) reviewing, and  responding  of a last week   Washington assault upon the Roman Catholic teenagers, in particular upon a boy, Nicholas Sandmann who were standing in  place waiting for their group’s bus to pick them up.  Some students wore MakeAmerica Great Hats.

About 70% of today’s American voting Jews vote LEFT and have so throughout my adult lifetime.  I was born in 1934, by luck, raised, and schooled in a Jewish minority community in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Let’s imagine a group of Jewish teens were  visiting the Lincoln Memorial last week instead of  those Christian ones! Let’s say ten of the students were wearing Bernie Sanders caps instead of the MAGA ones.     Let us imagine they suffered the same lies, the same attacks,  threats,  intimidation,  vulgarities,  threatened by  the fascists circling around their bus stop.  Let us also  imagine these young Jewish kids and their school and religion had to endure the same CNN’s evil falsely   advertising,  smearing the Christian youths with racism, and  reporting this  fake news  on national American television from  coast to coast , selling the same lies falsely attacking a 16 year old boy as they did attack 16 year old Roman Catholic student, Nicholas Sandmann.

Would the same CNN, FOX, PBS, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC “news” institutions  have reported the Jewish event the same way  they did so readily attacking  ROMAN CATHOLICS AS THESE CNN AND OTHER LEFTISTS DID LAST WEEK?

How would our American Jewish communities react to an identical false CNN television  assault on their students these days?

What if 16 year old, Nicholas Sandmann were a “David Rosenberg” of Jewish Hebrew Center of New York City instead,  and their school and its students waiting for a bus in Washington, DC were equally threatened, abused, and falsely insulted throughout CNN, MSNBC, CBS, PBS, NBC, and ABC television and newsprint,  instead of Roman Catholic kids from Covington, Kentucky?

I know I would be furious!  Unlike today’s fascist left wing American public schools, my  JudeoChristian public school teachers and Protestant Church of  St. Paul, Minnesota 65 years ago taught me practicing honesty was an absolute requirement for the survival of any civilized society striving to maintain  basic freedoms for human existence.

Would Jewish Howard Kurtz, and Jewish Mara Liasson,  would America’s  Jewish leftist world  be so nonchalant, so casual, unbothered as those Fox folks covering  the incident   at Kurtz  time were on Sunday, yawning, as if nothing serious really happened.

Please do yourself and our American republic a favor….WAKE UP, CIVILIZED AMERICA! YOUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU TO SEEK AND DEFEND TRUTH MORE THAN EVER!!!  Today’s deceitful ditsy Dems and foreign oriented business tycoons  want to destroy it!

https://www.thedailybeast.com/covington-catholic-teen-nicholas-sandmann-i-had-every-right-to-stand-there

https://www.thedailybeast.com/covington-catholic-teen-nicholas-sandmann-i-had-every-right-to-stand-there

https://www.thedailybeast.com/covington-catholic-teen-nicholas-sandmann-i-had-every-right-to-stand-there

https://hotair.com/archives/2019/01/26/andrew-sullivan-covington-16-year-olds-subjected-verbal-racist-assault/

U.S. Media Leftist Fascists Study Trump 2016 Victory….(so such conservative victories will never occur again?)

The True Story of the Media’s Role in Trump’s Victory

by Adam Ellwanger  at American Thinker:

 

Last weekend, the New York Times (America’s leading Very Serious Newspaper) published an opinion piece from Frank Bruni in which he cautioned the media to learn from their mistakes in 2016:

Thomas Patterson of Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy has been analyzing that coverage since Trump declared his candidacy for the presidency in 2015.  Patterson found that for much of that year, the number of stories about Trump in the country’s most influential newspapers and on its principal newscasts significantly exceeded what his support in polls at the time justified.

And those stories were predominantly positive.  “The volume and tone of the coverage helped propel Trump to the top of Republican polls,” Patterson wrote in one of his reports about the election.  In stark contrast, stories about Hillary Clinton in 2015 were mostly negative.

Through the first half of 2016, as Trump racked up victories in the Republican primaries, he commanded much more coverage than any other candidate from either party, and it was evenly balanced between positive and negative appraisals – unlike the coverage of Clinton, which remained mostly negative.

Only during their general-election face-off in the latter half of 2016 did Trump and Clinton confront equivalent tides of naysaying[.] …

Regarding their fitness for office, they were treated identically?  In retrospect, that’s madness.

It is high time for the media to learn some lessons from 2016.  But which lesson does Bruni refer to?  That the media need to return to their disinterested objectivity in election coverage?  Far from it.  A close read of the passage above shows that Bruni (and, by extension, the New York Times) thinks the problem was that the media were too objective in 2016.  Bruni would have us believe that had news outlets taken an even more partisan approach to covering Trump, Hillary might have won.  In short, that’s hogwash.  I’m not even sure if even Bruni believes it.  Either he does, which means he is delusional, or he doesn’t, in which case he is using the pages of the Times to advance revisionist history to conceal the real role that “news” organizations like the Times played in Trump’s election.

It’s time to set the record straight.

When Trump announced his candidacy, virtually no one on the right took it seriously.  But the news media did – for strategic reasons, as I will show.  Had the news media not given Trump wall-to-wall coverage in the early phases of the campaign, he likely would have been the Wesley Clark or the Herman Cain of the 2016 cycle – an early flavor-of-the-week candidate who quickly faded once the primaries began.  Like most in-the-know kingmakers on the right, the left and the media (correctly, at first) believed that Trump was fundamentally unable to win the presidency.  And so, the legacy media set to work ensuring that Trump was the Republican nominee.  The goal was to guarantee that Hillary would face the weakest candidate possible.  That is why, as Bruni noted, “the number of stories about Trump in the country’s most influential newspapers and on its principal newscasts significantly exceeded what his support in polls at the time justified.”  That is why “those stories were predominantly positive.”  And that is why people on the right were so chagrined by the media’s attempt to fix the nomination process – candidates like Rubio and Cruz, who were thought to be good matches for Hillary, couldn’t get any traction in the press.

The tone of Trump’s coverage changed on a dime once he had secured the nomination.  Ever since they managed to turn a neophyte named Barack Obama into a presidential frontrunner after a single great speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, the elite media have recognized the power they have in influencing public opinion and, in turn, determining the outcome of public elections.  Beyond that, ever since Obama’s 2008 victory, those media outlets have led themselves to believe that it is their obligation to influence our elections.  After all – as they show almost daily – they know what’s best for us.

By the time of his nomination, the legacy media had built Trump a movement.  They had no idea how difficult it would be to dismantle before November.  But they tried.  Mightily.  Does anyone with a brain believe that mainstream news outlets just happened to discover the “pussy-grabbing” tapes three weeks before the election?  If you are a rational person, you know that they were aware of those tapes well before the nomination.  So why didn’t we learn about them in February?  Or March?  Or April?  The answer is obvious, even to hacks like Frank Bruni.  The tapes weren’t useful to the news media’s agenda in April.  But they were useful in October – just not useful enough.

Trump won, and in retrospect, it’s a damn good thing he did – for a good many reasons, but particularly because it exposed the media’s manipulation of the democratic process.  The true history that I have outlined above is the real source of the media establishment’s incendiary rage against Trump.  It’s not simply that he is a Republican president (though that would be enough).  It’s that they’re furious that their schemes backfired.  They’re furious that they themselves (and no one else) deprived themselves of their divine right to choose the course of this nation.

All this explains why people like Frank Bruni are unable or unwilling to draw the proper conclusions regarding their role in 2016.  The lesson should be the opposite of the one Bruni draws: the media must return to a disinterested objectivity.  But learning that lesson would mean resisting their ability to unduly influence election campaigns.  And that would require a recognition that the American people are at least as capable of making political decisions as our enlightened betters in the media.  That can’t happen.  So the only response can be more bias, more vitriol, more selective “fact-checking,” more self-righteousness, and more obfuscation.

It is important that people on the right read nonsense like Bruni’s essay – it tells us what we are in for in 2020.  Bruni is calling for those in the legacy media to work harder than ever at rigging the democratic process in this country.  That’s the kind of fight we’re in for.  Time to start preparing for it.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/the_true_story_of_the_medias_role_in_trumps_victory.html

Our America Now Ruled by Mercenaries!

Tucker Carlson: We Are Ruled By Mercenaries Who Feel No Long-Term Obligation To The People They Rule

Posted By Ian Schwartz

 

Tucker Carlson delivered a monologue on how the American citizen is being exploited on the Wednesday edition of his FOX News show:

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Happy New Year. Newly-elected Utah senator Mitt Romney kicked off 2019 with an op-ed in the Washington Post savaging Donald Trump’s character and leadership. Romney’s attack and Trump’s response this morning on Twitter are the latest salvos in a longstanding personal feud between the two men. It’s even possible that Romney is planning to challenge Trump for the Republican nomination in 2020. We’ll see. But for now, Romney’s piece is fascinating on its own terms. It’s a window into how the people in charge, in both parties, see our country.

Romney’s main complaint is that Donald Trump is a mercurial and divisive leader. That’s true of course. Beneath the personal slights, though, Romney has a policy critique. He seems genuinely angry that Trump might pull American troops out of the Syrian civil war. Romney doesn’t explain how staying in Syria would benefit America. He doesn’t appear to consider that a relevant question. More policing in the Middle East is always better. We know that. Virtually everyone in Washington agrees.

Corporate tax cuts are also popular in Washington, and Romney is strongly on board with those too. His piece throws a rare compliment to Trump for cutting the corporate rate a year ago. This isn’t surprising. Romney spent the bulk of his business career at a firm called Bain Capital. Bain Capital all but invented what is now a familiar business strategy: take over an existing company for a short period of time, cut costs by firing employees, run up the debt, extract the wealth, and move on, sometimes leaving retirees without their earned pensions. Romney became fantastically rich doing this. Meanwhile, a remarkable number of those companies are now bankrupt or extinct. This is the private equity model. Our ruling class sees nothing wrong with it. It’s how they run the country.

Mitt Romney refers to unwavering support for a finance-based economy and an internationalist foreign policy as the “mainstream Republican” view. He’s right. For generations, Republicans have considered it their duty to make the world safe for banking, while simultaneously prosecuting ever more foreign wars. Modern Democrats generally support these goals. There are signs, however, that most people do not support this, and not just in America. In countries around the world — France, Brazil, Sweden, the Philippines, Germany, and many others — voters are suddenly backing candidates and ideas that would have been unimaginable just a decade ago. These are not isolated events. What you’re watching is populations revolting against leaders who refuse to improve their lives.

Something like this has been in happening in our country for three years. Donald Trump rode a surge of popular discontent all the way to the White House. Does he understand the political revolution he harnessed? Can he reverse the economic and cultural trends that are destroying America? Those are open questions. But they’re less relevant than we think. At some point, Donald Trump will be gone. The rest of us will be too. The country will remain. What kind of country will be it be then? How do we want our grandchildren to live?

These are the only questions that matter. The answer used to be obvious: the overriding goal for America is more prosperity, meaning cheaper consumer goods. But is that still true? Does anyone still believe that cheaper iPhones, or more Amazon deliveries of plastic garbage from China are going to make us happy? They haven’t so far. A lot of Americans are drowning in stuff. Yet drug addiction and suicide are depopulating large parts of the country. Anyone who thinks the health of a nation can be summed up in GDP is an idiot.

The goal for America is both simpler and more elusive than mere prosperity. It’s happiness. There are a lot of ingredients in being happy: Dignity. Purpose. Self-control. Independence. Above all, deep relationships with other people. Those are the things that you want for your children. They’re what our leaders should want for us, and would if they cared. But our leaders don’t care. We are ruled by mercenaries who feel no long-term obligation to the people they rule. They’re day traders. Substitute teachers. They’re just passing through. They have no skin in this game, and it shows. They can’t solve our problems. They don’t even bother to understand our problems.

One of the biggest lies our leaders tell is that you can separate economics from everything else that matters. Economics is a topic for public debate. Family and faith and culture, those are personal matters. Both parties believe this. Members of our educated upper-middle-classes, now the backbone of the Democratic Party, usually describe themselves as fiscally responsible and socially moderate. In other words, functionally libertarian. They don’t care how you live, as long as the bills are paid and the markets function. Somehow they don’t see a connection between people’s personal lives and the health of our economy, or for that matter, the country’s ability to pay its bills. As far as they’re concerned, these are two totally separate categories.

Social conservatives, meanwhile, come to the debate from the opposite perspective, but reach a strikingly similar conclusion. The real problem, you’ll hear them say, is that the American family is collapsing. Nothing can be fixed before we fix that. Yet, like the libertarians they claim to oppose, many social conservatives also consider markets sacrosanct. The idea that families are being crushed by market forces seems never to occur to them. They refuse to consider it. Questioning markets feels like apostasy.

Both sides miss the obvious point: culture and economics are inseparably intertwined. Certain economic systems allow families to thrive. Thriving families make market economies possible. You can’t separate the two. It used to be possible to deny this. Not anymore. The evidence is now overwhelming. Consider the inner cities. Thirty years ago, conservatives looked at Detroit or Newark and were horrified by what they saw. Conventional families had all but disappeared in poor neighborhoods. The majority of children were born out of wedlock. Single mothers were the rule. Crime and drugs and disorder became universal. What caused this nightmare? Liberals didn’t want to acknowledge the question. They were benefiting from the disaster, in the form of reliable votes. Conservatives, though, had a ready explanation for inner city dysfunction: big government. Decades of badly-designed social programs had driven fathers from the home and created what they called a “culture of poverty” that trapped people in generational decline.

There was truth in what the conservatives said. But it wasn’t the whole story. How do we know? Because virtually the same thing has happened decades later to an entirely different population. In many ways, rural America now looks a lot like Detroit. This is striking because rural Americans don’t seem to have much in common with people from the inner city. These groups have different cultures, different traditions and political beliefs. Usually they have different skin colors. Rural people are white conservatives, mostly. Yet the pathologies of modern rural America are familiar to anyone who visited downtown Baltimore in the 1980s: Stunning out of wedlock birthrates. High male unemployment. A terrifying drug epidemic.

Two different worlds. Similar outcomes. How did this happen? You’d think our ruling class would be interested in knowing the answer. Mostly they’re not. They don’t have to be. It’s easier to import foreign labor to take the place of native-born Americans who are slipping behind. But Republicans now represent rural voters. They ought to be interested. Here’s a big part of the answer: male wages declined. Manufacturing, a male-dominated industry, all but disappeared over the course of a generation. All that remained in many areas were the schools and the hospitals, both traditional employers of women. In many places, women suddenly made more than men. Before you applaud this as a victory for feminism, consider the effects. Study after study has shown that when men make less than women, women generally don’t want to marry them. Maybe they should want to, but they don’t. Over big populations, this causes a drop in marriage, a spike in out of wedlock births, and all the familiar disasters that follow: more drug and alcohol abuse, higher incarceration rates, fewer families formed in the next generation. This isn’t speculation, or propaganda from the evangelicals. It’s social science. We know it’s true. Rich people know it best of all. That’s why they get married before they have kids. That model works. Increasingly, marriage is a luxury only the affluent in America can afford.

And yet, and here’s the bewildering and infuriating part, those very same affluent married people, the ones making virtually all the decisions in our society, are doing pretty much nothing to help the people below them get and stay married. Rich people are happy to fight malaria in Congo. But working to raise men’s wages in Dayton or Detroit? That’s crazy.

This is negligence on a massive scale. Both parties ignore the crisis in marriage. Our mindless cultural leaders act like it’s still 1961, and the biggest problem American families face is that sexism is preventing millions of housewives from becoming investment bankers or Facebook executives.

For our ruling class, more investment banking is always the answer. They teach us it’s more virtuous to devote your life to some soulless corporation than it is to raise your own kids. Sheryl Sandburg of Facebook wrote an entire book about this. Sandburg explained that our first duty is to shareholders, above our own children. No surprise there. Sandburg herself is one of America’s biggest shareholders. Propaganda like this has made her rich. What’s remarkable is how the rest of us responded. We didn’t question why Sandburg was saying this. We didn’t laugh in her face at the pure absurdity of it. Our corporate media celebrated Sandburg as the leader of a liberation movement. Her book became a bestseller: Lean In. As if putting a corporation first is empowerment. It’s not. It’s bondage. Republicans should say so.

They should also speak out against the ugliest parts of our financial system. Not all commerce is good. Why is it defensible to loan people money they can’t possibly repay? Or charge them interest that impoverishes them? Payday loan outlets in poor neighborhoods collect 400 percent annual interest. We’re ok with that? We shouldn’t be. Libertarians tell us that’s how markets work: consenting adults making voluntary decisions about how to live their lives. OK. But it’s also disgusting. If you care about America, you ought to oppose the exploitation of Americans, whether it’s happening in the inner city or on Wall Street.

And by the way, if you really loved your fellow Americans, if it would break your heart to see them high all the time. Which they are. A huge number of our kids, especially our boys, are smoking weed constantly. You may not realize that, because new technology has made it odorless. But it’s everywhere. That’s not an accident. Once our leaders understood they could get rich from marijuana, marijuana became ubiquitous. In many places, tax-hungry politicians have legalized or decriminalized it. Former Speaker of the House John Boehner now lobbies for the marijuana industry. His fellow Republicans seem fine with that. “Oh, but it’s better for you than alcohol,” they tell us. Maybe. Who cares? Talk about missing the point. Try having dinner with a 19-year-old who’s been smoking weed. The life is gone. Passive, flat, trapped in their own heads. Do you want that for your kids? Of course not. Then why are our leaders pushing it on us? You know the reason. Because they don’t care about you.

When you care about people, you do your best to treat them fairly. Our leaders don’t even try. They hand out jobs and contracts and scholarships and slots at prestigious universities based purely on how we look. There’s nothing less fair than that, though our tax code comes close. Under our current system, an American who works for a salary pays about twice the tax rate of someone who’s living off inherited money and doesn’t work at all. We tax capital at half of what we tax labor. It’s a sweet deal if you work in finance, as many of the richest people do. In 2010, for example, Mitt Romney made about $22 million dollars in investment income. He paid a federal tax rate of 14 percent. For normal upper-middle-class wage earners, the federal tax rate is nearly 40 percent. No wonder Romney supports the status quo. But for everyone else, it’s infuriating. Our leaders rarely mention any of this. They tell us our multi-tiered tax code is based on the principles of the free market. Please. It’s based on laws that congress passed, laws that companies lobbied for in order to increase their economic advantage. It worked well for those people, but at a big cost to everyone else. Unfairness is profoundly divisive. When you favor one child over another, your kids don’t hate you. They hate each other. That happens in countries too. It’s happening in ours, probably by design. Divided countries are easier to rule. Nothing divides us like the perception that some people are getting special treatment. In our country, some people definitely are. Republicans should oppose that with everything they have.

What kind of country do you want to live in? A fair country. A decent country. A cohesive country. A country whose leaders don’t accelerate the forces of change purely for their own profit and amusement. A country you might recognize when you’re old. A country that listens to young people who don’t live in Brooklyn. A country where you can make a solid living outside of the big cities. A country where Lewiston, Maine seems almost as important as the west side of Los Angeles. A country where environmentalism means getting outside and picking up the trash. A clean, orderly, stable country that respects itself. And above all, a country where normal people with an average education who grew up no place special can get married, and have happy kids, and repeat unto the generations. A country that actually cares about families, the building block of everything.

What will it take a get a country like that? Leaders who want it. For now, those leaders will have to be Republicans. There’s no option at this point. But first, Republican leaders will have to acknowledge that market capitalism is not a religion. Market capitalism is a tool, like a staple gun or a toaster. You’d have to be a fool to worship it. Our system was created by human beings for the benefit of human beings. We do not exist to serve markets. Just the opposite. Any economic system that weakens and destroys families isn’t worth having. A system like that is the enemy of a healthy society.

Internalizing this won’t be easy for Republican leaders. They’ll have to unlearn decades of bumper sticker-talking points and corporate propaganda. They’ll likely lose donors in the process. Libertarians are sure to call any deviation from market fundamentalism a form of socialism. That’s a lie. Socialism is a disaster. It doesn’t work. It’s what we should be working desperately to avoid. But socialism is exactly what we’re going to get, and soon, unless a group of responsible people in our political system reforms the American economy in a way that protects normal people.

If you want to put America first, you’ve got to put its families first.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/01/03/tucker_carlson_we_are_ruled_by_mercenaries_who_feel_no_long-term_obligation_to_the_people_they_rule.html