Stand at EASE!!!
If you Troops never believe anything else I say, PLEASE believe
THIS!!! hitlery klintsky is a WORST threat to our liberty than
o(WHATTA)bummer and he's been the most damaging occupant who ever
lied, cheated and stole his way into the White House.
If anyone votes for her, I have to believe that they are mentally
deficient, brainwashed or just plain stoopid!! I am sorry about that
(not for saying it) but I say it because it is true.
In an effort to persuade the teachable, among lib/lefties, I
relinquish my class, to someone who has expressed my thoughts (I
believe) better than I could. Please pay "strictly attention" (in the
words of my old D.I.) to his words.
B-4 I relinquish the lectern, I must give this advisory. The Prop. 62
description, on the ballot, is a lie. It It DOES NOT replace the
death penalty w/ life w/out parole. Read Sec.4, of the full text which
includes he words"...or imprisonment ...for a term of 25
years to life."
Bottom line, although the death penalty is flawed, don't let them
decieve you into scrapping it for this LIE!!! If life w/out parole
pencils out as more economical and you want to go on "the cheap",
fine but THIS ISN'T THE FIX. On top of this, the idea that
"lifers" would be required to work and pay part of their pay to the
families of their victims is ABSURD!!! How ya gonna force them
to work, give them life w/out parole, again?, beat them? execute them?
Oh, no, you can't do that, you abalished the death penalty.
And what do you do if they kill someone IN PRISON? Same choices. I
STRONGLY recommend a "No" vote on Prop. 62.
Personally, I favor the death penalty with a higher level of proof,
thereby eliminating the very real possibility of executing the
innocent, but if you wish to go with "life w/out parole", fine, but
make it ABSOLUTE, no alternative, as 25 to life. Don't let the
"machine LIE to you.
If I could have provided a link to Mr. Hull, I would have so here 'tis, in full.
Un-COVER!!! (Silent prayer or contemplation.)
HOOAAAHHH!!!
COVER!! SEATS!!!
Mr. Hull, please proceed.
By Christopher C. Hull - 10 May 2016
Ted Cruz supporters, and I am one, have a decision to make.
My story on this decision starts on May 20, 2014, the night I had the
great good fortune to attend a small dinner with Sen. Ted Cruz, to
talk strategy and policy. Personally, I was skeptical of him and his
chances in a potential presidential bid, which fluttered over the
entire conversation like a smart, subtle butterfly.
His replies to my questions floored me. Why on Earth would he run for
president when he’d been in the Senate less than two years? Because,
he said, he was looking for someone else who was fighting the
conservative fight on more than one or two of the major issues of the
day – ObamaCare, Amnesty, a rational foreign policy based on peace
through strength – and just literally wasn’t seeing anyone else doing
it. Other than my boss at the time, Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, I had to
flatly admit that was true.
How could he possibly hope to win, I asked? Everyone had counted him
out of the Senate bid as well, he said, and he defeated the
Establishment favorite and went on to victory in the fall in a bad GOP
year.
Republican moderates said every four years, “We need to nominate
someone who can win” – and then when the party nominates their choice,
they lose, over and over, Ford, Dole, McCain, Romney, because they
don’t excite the base or draw in skeptical Independents and Democrats
with a compelling vision. It was exactly what I had been arguing for
years in academics and beyond.
I came out of that dinner a believer. I’ve been one ever since, even
when my belief was tested, as inevitably it was.
Today, all of us who believe Sen. Cruz would make a great president –
and conservatives generally – need to decide whether or not we support
Donald Trump, now that he is the almost-certain Republican nominee.
Some staunch conservatives have decided they can’t – to the point that
they may help orchestrate a third-party challenge on Trump’s right.
While I respect that view, I don’t share it. Here are five reasons for
a Cruz supporter, and a constitutional conservative more generally, to
back Trump, for whatever they’re worth:
1) You had me at “Hillary.”
A third party bid all but assures that Hillary Clinton, Richard Nixon
with breasts, will become president. As of today, Trump has the best
shot at beating Hillary – and it is absolutely possible, stop saying
it’s not.
Republicans who believe Donald Trump is really as bad as Hillary
Clinton simultaneously argue that he is lying about what he would do
on immigration, abortion, and gun control, but not lying about what he
would do on trade and taxes. (If you are more sympathetic to his
trade-skeptic and tax-cutting ways, by the way, this double-edged
argument actually cuts the wrong way in both directions.) Likewise
they assert that in our post-Constitutional era, Hillary would be
gridlocked by Congress, while Trump would not be. Would she not have a
pen and a phone, like Obama?
2) If Trump wins, the Establishment loses.
OK, so you still think The Donald is as bad or worse than Hillary.
Consider this: If Donald Trump loses this election, the Republican
Establishment wins it. Trump’s voters will give up voting for the rest
of their rapidly shortening lives, which some say they deserve (that’s
a winning message for the general election by the way).
Moderates and the media will crow that they told us so: We need to go
back to nominating moderates who lose the old-fashioned way. And many
conservative voters will grudgingly conclude they’re right. Consider
the alternative: If Trump wins this election, the GOP Establishment is
finished.
He will have proven once and for all that given the chance, voters
reject the pro-amnesty, free-trade-at-all-costs,
sweep-social-issues-under-the-carpet, Leftist-narrative-accepting,
Washington-Post-only-reading, corrupt pay-for-play politics of the
party’s Washington wing.
3) A Trump Presidency would be the Best Antidote for Political Correctness.
Remember, PC did not originate on American college campuses in the
1980s. Plato wrote in his Republic of the need, in the words of one
(supportive) scholar, to “suppress free speech and to spread lies in
the interest of the state.”
Karl Marx wrote with approval about suppression of speech during the
short-lived radical socialist Paris Commune in 1871. When Marxist
revolution did not sweep the world after Moscow fell in 1917,
socialist theorists trying to figure out why came together in the
(in)famous Frankfurt School, housed at the Institute for Social
Research (ISR).
The explicitly Marxist Frankfurt School produced Theodor Adorno and
Walter Benjamin in the 1920s, arguably the forefathers of
Deconstructionism premised on the idea that “truth is the death of
intention.” The Frankfurt School also spawned Herbert Marcuse, who
joined it in 1932, then almost unbelievably worked in the U.S. Office
of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War II and headed the Central
European Section of the U.S. Office of Intelligence Research after the
War.
The father of the New Left, Marcuse wrote Eros and Civilization (1955)
arguing for a sexual revolution to throw off the chains of repression,
as well as Repressive Tolerance (1965), which argues for “the practice
of discriminating tolerance in an inverse direction, as a means of
shifting the balance between Right and Left by restraining the liberty
of the Right.” What we call PC is better understood as cultural
Marxism, perhaps the greatest struggle of our time of communism
against freedom, in which communism is currently winning.
Why did Trump’s support tend to increase with each “gaffe?” Americans
instinctively yearn for someone, anyone, to challenge, snap, and
eventually destroy the Left’s linguistic fetters that grow tighter
every year. Who could possibly do that better than Donald Trump?
4) Trump takes the border and the Jihadi threat seriously.
Whatever you think of Donald Trump’s positions, including their
various incarnations over the course of the campaign, he has taken
perhaps the strongest stance in the originally 17-person GOP field on
immigration. That includes standing up against both illegal aliens
pouring across the border as well as what sometimes appears to be
Obama’s single-minded attempt to import Jihadis.
If he decides to totally abandon those positions, he couldn’t possibly
be worse than Hillary Clinton on border security. But if he’s serious
about anything, he appears to be most serious about this. Don’t throw
away the potential opportunity to save our territorial integrity and
our nation’s security based on an impression that Trump is not a
politician and therefore doesn’t conform to a politician’s airbrushed
policy positions.
Most Establishment Republicans have been lying to you for decades on
immigration; will you really not vote for Trump because you think he’s
mediocre at achieving their level of mellifluous mendacity, when he
appears to at least be serious?
5) Trump gives us at least a chance of preserving the Supreme Court
and thereby the Constitution.
The Left’s attempt to crack down on your freedom of speech is hardly
limited to college campuses. In Europe, without the Constitution’s
protections, you can be arrested for quoting Churchill or writing a
poem about a foreign leader.
Already here in America, Democrats are kicking in the doors of
political opponents, jailing those who do not believe in gay marriage,
and most recently subpoenaing think tanks for climate change apostasy.
Donald Trump is now all that stands between you and a Hillary
Clinton-appointed justice who would create a Supreme Court majority of
“Interpretivists,” the legal school of thought reacting against the
Court’s restrictions on the New Deal which teaches that the
Constitution means whatever Leftists believe it should.
The Court has become a mini-legislature in which today’s four
Democratic appointees vote in lockstep while the five Republicans do
not. I had the privilege to attend a meeting with Justice Antonin
Scalia just months before his death at which he noted that for 50
years GOP nominees have been an ideological coin-flip, while
Democratic nominees have been uniformly leftist. Granted, early signs
of what Trump might do have not been promising.
But anything is more promising than the absolute certainty that
Hillary would follow in a half-century-long drive to control the
court, including striking down the Second Amendment, supporting her
unilateral efforts beyond those of President Obama to open the borders
and impose climate change regulations, count illegal immigrants when
drawing districts, impose restrictions on your political speech,
enshrine abortion and gay marriage for another generation, and protect
government employee unions’ ability to take money straight out of
their members’ paychecks and spend it on candidates you – and
sometimes they – loathe.
In short, a Hillary Clinton presidency would mean the end of the
Constitution has you understand it. There’s at least a shot that a
Trump presidency would protect the Court majority – especially if you
support him and end up helping make the choice.
Granted, Trump poses the danger that he doesn’t mean what he says on
issues where you agree, or that he does agree with his less savory
supporters on issues on which we passionately disagree. But if good
conservatives – especially principled Cruz supporters – like you don’t
support him, only they will. He loses, the Establishment and Hillary
win. He wins, and those supporters will help shape his presidency.
Those who choose to sit this election out or support a third-party
candidate will have my respect for their decision. But don’t choose
either path without considering the consequences in the context of the
struggle for America in which the nation is currently engaged.
End of Mr. Hull's class.
Please pass this along to your lib/left associates, in the hope that
they will either see the light or have a fit of apoplexy.
On your FEET!!! Un-COVER!!!
Heavenly Father, into Your hands we commit the fate of our nation in
the hope that you will save us from the evil left. In all things I
thank and praise You and
(especially) I thank You for the gift and sacrifice of Your Son, Jesus
Christ, my Lord and Savior, in Whose Name I pray, HOOAAHHH!!!
COVER!!! Dis -MISSED!!!
Sgt Mack, leaving the air and closing station. HOOAAHHH!!!
All opinions stated in this class are the opinions of the instructor
and may not reflect the opinions of the Editor and publisher.
