Unified Patriots http://www.unifiedpatriots.com Electing Constitutional Conservatives To Public Office Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:48:39 +0000 en-US hourly 1 20421468 By an Angel’s Kiss, SSG Matthew V Thompson, 28 (Afghanistan) http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/26/by-an-angels-kiss-ssg-matthew-v-thompson-28-afghanistan/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/26/by-an-angels-kiss-ssg-matthew-v-thompson-28-afghanistan/#respond Fri, 26 Aug 2016 11:15:29 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64274 angel

Kissed by an Angel, Where Violins are the Angels’ Voices, and the Cello Sings Harmony.

SSG Matthew V Thompson, 28, of Irvine CA

died 23 August 2016 in Hellmand Province, Afghanistan from an IED

He was of 3rd Bn, 1st Special Forces Group, Airborne

Rest in peace, Staff Sergeant

Job well done.  angeleagle


Give me, my God, what you still have; give me what no one asks for. I do not ask for wealth, nor success, nor even health. People ask you so often, God, for all that, that you cannot have any left. Give me, my God, what you still have. Give me what people refuse to accept from you. I want insecurity and disquietude; I want turmoil and brawl. And if you should give them to me, my God, once and for all, let me be sure to have them always, for

I will not always have the courage to ask for them.
http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/26/by-an-angels-kiss-ssg-matthew-v-thompson-28-afghanistan/feed/ 0 64274
The Trump Do-it-Yourself Home Voter Fraud Kit http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/25/the-trump-do-it-yourself-home-voter-fraud-kit/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/25/the-trump-do-it-yourself-home-voter-fraud-kit/#respond Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:18:33 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64265 Since 1932 there has not been a national presidential election that the Democrat Party has not tried to steal. In 1952, they were simply swamped, a puffed-up liberal versus a national hero. In 1968 and 1980, events beyond their control, but their fault, (the Vietnam War and the National Embarrassment) were simply too huge to hide, lie about, or cheat around. In both cases the people felt a pain from government that hit them personally. And that is where we are today.

This 2016 election most closely mirrors the national mood and embarrassment of 1980, only this time the Democrats are not caught off guard with what is being dubbed as the “hidden voters” that carried Ronald Reagan to victory in 1980. Because they have known for some time, I’m quite certain the Democrats have some special tricks up their sleeves, for they need to steal closer to 5% this time than the standard 3%. That’s quite an undertaking.

And I can’t offer a fix here, just a way in which ordinary Americans can be involved and possibly make a difference with a few hours of their time.

From the Trump side

I hope the Trump campaign has given some serious thought to what they can do to preempt this threat, as well as compiling an historical record, a notebook if you will, that can be used for future use. (Republicans should have been compiling this since 2000, but haven’t, for a variety of reasons.)

Most of the Democrat plans are based on the belief they won’t be caught or that most criminal events can be trivialized, compared to say the many thousands of votes the GOP tries to suppress with voter-ID legislation. Thwarted by unfriendly state and federal judges, it seems recent GOP gains in the state legislatures have been fairly ineffective in stemming voter fraud by Democrats. A new sheriff in town will help.

It’s for the Trump campaign to make this undertaking unilaterally – for in most instances they will not be able to rely on local Republican committees to provide on-the-ground intelligence, as the GOP goes out its way to see or hear no evil out of fear of being labeled racist.

Now that the GOP has largely signed on with the Ruling Class as junior partners, offering only cosmetic cover for the Trump campaign, the battle lines have never been more clear: the Commoners versus the Royals, or as Ann Coulter calls it, (in her new book, In Trump We Trust), “the working class against the smirking class.”

Therefore, the Trump campaign would be wise to look for assistance on the ground by directly communicating with the voter integrity groups in the several states. A one or two-hour conversation with them should produce a wealth of names of people who front voter fraud operations; from financial sponsors, lawyers and college professors, to the handlers at street level.

We all know that some states, and only some districts, counties, or precincts within those states are more critical than others. But I am encouraging, below, that even in safer states, that volunteers join together to audit as many voting precincts as they can, since, after the dust settles, a type of analysis can be established that can be built upon and used in future elections.

To the extent we can, we want to identify and impede illegal voting practices by the Democrats in the 2016 election, some of which (e.g. WiFi hacking of voter machines) are beyond our ability to control. (I think Trump has people on it.) But just in knowing that people are outside the voting area auditing election counts can have a chilling effect on what the criminally-minded inside have in mind – for a variety of reasons

I’m hoping the Trump campaign will pick up the baton, and provide a way for these volunteer groups to contact them, and give them a heads-up about their activities in various precincts. This is predicated on the Trump campaign insuring that it has its own trained poll watchers inside the voting precinct, rather than handing that chore over to the local GOP. Those often go all wobbly at the worst times, especially since in many districts, intimidation inside the voting area is a key to their success.

*    *    *    *    *    *

THE VOTING AUDIT, a simple process to verify the basic vote

So, assuming they will try to steal, here’s what you and 4 or 5 friends can do to verify an honest election count in your precinct.

What follows is a summary of my chalkboard presentation:

The Audit

The audit is the main tool in verifying voter integrity, for all you and your team are doing is standing outside the entrance and exit and counting the voters going in the front door and the voters coming out the back door.

Most precincts will count 1500-2500 votes over the 10-12 hour period the polls are open. This count will be tedious, so it may be best if you use two teams so that counters can be spelled every 2-3 hours. I recommend a team of six, for you will need some backup if trouble should arise.

You can adopt your own count format, but a sheet of paper on a clipboard is all you need. I recommend you stand well away from the place where people line up (most state laws require 100 feet).

Step I: Your entrance-exit numbers should match: e.g., 1500 in, 1500 out. You can finish this step immediate at the close of the polls. Don’t leave until the doors are locked.

Step II: These numbers should match the official tally once the secretary of state certifies them, and the totals are posted on the State Election website a few days later. Acquaint yourself with this website as soon as possible. It’s a treasure trove of voting history.

If you find major variations in Step II with Step I you can do little to effect the election, but notify the Trump campaign right away. Your charts will then become potential evidence.

You need to make a physical site evaluation – location of entrance and exit doors as well as other doors that might be used to gain entrance and exit, not necessarily in easy view. It would be helpful for one of your team to be among the first to vote so that he/she can draw from memory once outside the layout of the voting area, especially other doors that may or may not be secure and the location of key personnel.

And, look for variations in this general scheme, such as if voters go in and out of the same door, or if a person is turned away, i.e., for no proper ID, can’t speak English or appears to be only about 12-years of age; from which door do they exit? This will affect your count total versus the final tally of votes cast in Step II. (All these were tried in Virginia in 2012, and all were allowed to make out provisional ballots, and no one is sure whether they were ever counted. Determining this is the job of the Trump poll watchers inside.)

(Check your own state laws for rules of people standing around voting areas…usually 100 feet.)


The mere fact that you are outside doing this count may upset some people inside the voting area, so you also have to be prepared for confrontation even though you will be breaking no laws.

Statistical analysis of the officially reported count: 1) Look for the over-count, which means someone is either gaining access through another door, or that extra ballots are being cast inside; but also 2)  Look for the undercount, e.g, if  your count shows that 2200 voters went in but only 1900 votes were counted. 3) Finally, compare your numbers with prior presidential elections, going back to 2000 if necessary, to see if voting patterns for your precinct have changed. Then make a final comparison once the totals have been officially posted.  (Note: Some voting districts have been reapportioned, as suburban counties especially will revise the voting districts to keep the voting districts in parity.)

Recommended: I recommend a team of six volunteers, two at each station, so that each counter can be relieved every two-three hours, as mentioned earlier. You may need a video filmer/general back-up and a way to communicate with him or her, as it would be advisable to have friends “in the weeds” to photograph/film any election official, thug, police officer, who might walk up and question what you’re doing. Legally, you have every right to be there if outside the legal perimeter, but that does not mean that in a Democrat-controlled district they will not try intimidation to get you to leave. Just get it on film, but also use a signal with another team member to time stamp the event and continue the counting from another vantage point. Don’t lose count if at all possible. Just shift it from one counter to another, with a time stamp and some identifying marker. (Crowd counters use these all the time.)

If you have a Trump contact, send the information to them ASAP. This is also evidence.


Prior to election day it would be best if you do a precinct-by-precinct comparison of votes for 2012, 2008, 2004 and 2000, for voter fraud is often found in the anomalies from one election to the other. Virtually every district, even the 80% GOP districts, are amenable to stealing a few votes, and in states where only a few thousand votes count, every vote counts. (This may explain why, in heavy 80%-90% Democrat districts they will still go to extremes to keep prying eyes from the voting area as we saw in Philadelphia in 2012, and why several secure Democrat counties reported 100%-0% votes for Obama, which is almost a statistical impossibility. Fred Sanford would have voted for Romney just because he didn’t like being told what to do. There are ways to correct this condition over time, but an honest Attorney General’s Office, state or federal, would save us a lot of expense in buying rose bush poison.)

This is a very simple two-step approach of monitoring attempts at voter theft in your locale. This is what cops and reporters used to call leg-work, like a stake-out. It is tedious and boring, and will likely prove nothing exciting except an on-the-ground insight into how the system works, versus (sometimes) how it is supposed to work.) The Democrats have dozens of ways to steal votes inside the precinct area, but my firm belief is that just in them knowing they are being scrutinized, system-wide, can have a chilling effect on their efforts, for while many of their paid voters who vote several times over many precincts, and actually are treated as heroes if they are caught, and do a little time in the stir, much like hoods who take a fall for the do – their mid-level protectors and planners are deathly afraid of being caught and publicly prosecuted.

If the people inside know you are outside “doing something” out of the ordinary it may cause them to change their own procedures as most of them don’t want to get caught. Combined with a stronger surveillance by poll watchers inside, who will not be intimidated, (which the Trump team needs to provide) it could significantly hamper their plans.

So then, you’re part of a two-prong defense, just by being there.

Since this is just a sketch, if you have any questions, feel free to contact me at vassarb@gmail.com

Have Rolled Up Newspaper Will Travel

http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/25/the-trump-do-it-yourself-home-voter-fraud-kit/feed/ 0 64265
Ought Donald Trump Focus on Getting the Lower-Propensity Voters to the Polls? http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/24/ought-donald-trump-focus-on-getting-the-lower-propensity-voters-to-the-polls/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/24/ought-donald-trump-focus-on-getting-the-lower-propensity-voters-to-the-polls/#comments Wed, 24 Aug 2016 05:57:18 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64257 It Both Increases Voter Turnout and Transforms the GOP.

Ought Donald Trump focus on getting the “lower propensity” voters to the polls.  To ask the question answers it.  Of course he should.

Will he?

I hope Donald Trump already has thought of all that follows.  He’s a billionaire.  He’s very smart.  He hires smart people to help him.  Me?  Just an attorney and former Army Intelligence officer with some relevant political campaign experience, common sense and strategic thinking.  And some success in precinct-level party politics.  Growing up in the 196os, I saw my dad and uncles back in Wisconsin win school board, city council, and county board elections – because they focused on what matters:  person-to-person get out the vote (“GOTV” — not a new cable network) efforts.

Two things matter in winning the Republican nomination:  getting the most caucus and primary votes and getting the most delegates to the national convention.  Mr. Trump achieved that.  Yay!

One thing matters in the general election.  Getting the greatest number of voters possible to the polls to vote for you.

Trump, now, needs to focus on getting the most “lower information, lower propensity” Republican and conservative independents to the polls and into the Republican Party precinct-level committeeman ranks.  As soon as possible.  And the best way to do both is to get as many conservative Republicans into the Republican Party’s local precinct committeeman slots in each voting precinct.

Assuming Trump hasn’t thought of all that follows, I offer the following 3-Part Strategy, which was offered during the lead-up to and during the 2012 campaign, gratis (free, to the younger readers), to several of the Republican primary candidates (in one case face-to-face with the candidate (who will remain nameless — but he’s still on the radio), and his campaign team) and to our eventual nominee.  None followed it.  As a result, they lost.

This Strategy convinces “hard core” conservatives (some are in the #NeverTrump “tantrum” ranks) of the candidate’s conservative beliefs, creates a GOTV ground game at the voting precinct level and transforms the Republican Party into a conservative political powerhouse, and increases turnout of the “lower information, lower propensity” good, decent Republican (and conservative independent) voters who need an extra little, personalized “nudge” to get to the polls.

Why didn’t the candidates who were given this Strategy follow it?  Despite that face-to-face meeting with the candidate and his team, in which he seemed to “get it,” one of his advisors later told me, while the candidate was still in the 2012 primary race, at a fund-raiser, where he didn’t say in his stump speech what I had told him to say, that, “The candidate just doesn’t say such things – the campaign directors are supposed to do this type of recruiting.”  In other words, the Strategy suffered from two fatal flaws that doom many new ideas:  It was infected with “Not-Invented-Here-itis” and “Nobody’s-Ever-Done-It-That-Way-itis.”  (If the most important thing for GOTV needs to be said to supporters, why not have the candidate say it?  Blank out.)

I’m convinced our eventual nominee in 2012, on the other hand, who also received this strategy and advice, did not want to grow the Republican Party at the grass roots with an infusion of conservatives into the precinct committeeman ranks because the last thing he wanted to have as a president was a reinvigorated, conservative Republican Party holding his feet to the fire.

Think about it.  Stop.  Think some more about it.

What a Trump presidency needs is exactly that:  An infusion of conservatives into the precinct committeeman ranks creating a reinvigorated, conservative Republican Party apparatus that will support his presidency.

So, on to an overview of the 3-Part Strategy.  

Part One:  Convince the Grassroots Conservatives of Your Conservatism

First, an outreach to conservatives personally by Trump (and by surrogates who enjoy the trust of the grass roots conservatives) to convince them he’s now, really, truly, committed to his current conservative positions and will not flop back from where he flipped.  Many conservative Republicans perceive Trump as less than a committed conservative.  He needs to convince them otherwise.

I can help him do this.

Part Two:  Ask That Conservatives Get Involved in Party Politics and GOTV

Second, an urgent, continual plea to every conservative audience that each of them get involved in Republican party politics as precinct committeemen and/or campaign volunteers, however they can, to help GOTV in their respective “political neighborhoods” – their voting precincts and as members of their local party committees — to increase the turnout of those Republican and center-right independents who have “stayed home” in the past.  This works.  It’s just common sense.  Tell them to go to DonaldJTrump.com and click on Get Involved and sign up as a volunteer to help GOTV.  I can help him make this happen.

Part Three:  Use the Best GOTV Software to Efficiently & Effectively GOTV

Third, use the BEST GOTV software to coordinate his GOTV efforts with all the new, energized, brand new precinct committeemen and campaign volunteers in, at least, the “battleground” states.  I recommend rVotes.  The Dems have been using VoteBuilder since 2008.  rVotes was developed by the same genius, Steve Adler, who developed VoteBuilder.  rVotes has been up and ready to go in at least the following states (and has been used on some state-wide races in some of them):  AZ, OH, FL, IA, MI, RI, VA.  It has a successful track record.  It has been offered to the RNC and the Romney campaign.  It was rejected by both the RNC and the Romney campaign, I suspect, because it empowers the grassroots conservative precinct committeemen – it allows the precinct committeemen to communicate with one another, and the “powers that be” do not want that.  Read everything at rvotes.com. Here we are going into the 2016 presidential election and other elections without any software from the RNC that precinct committeemen can use to communicate with one another to help GOTV in their precincts.  While the Dems use best-in-class GOTV software, the RNC provides no such software to the precinct committeemen.  Sabotage by the RNC?  You be the judge.

Dave Brat used this Strategy, and rVotes, to rout incumbent Eric Cantor in the 2014 primary.  That may be (I am being charitable) the reason the RNC will never license software like rVotes and provide it to the precinct committeemen.

I can help make this happen.

The Consultant Class’s Prescriptions Do Not Work and only Enrich Them

A Movement.  Capitalize on “Moving” Movement Members Into Moving More Voters To The Polls

We Good, Decent People Have A Civic Duty To Vote

A “high level” marketing campaign consisting of signs, radio ads, TV ads, robo calls, etc. is not, in my opinion, going to overcome the Democrat re-election machine.  Donald Trump needs to reinvigorate the American people with a spirit of civic duty to help their country in a time of crisis.  He has called his campaign a “movement.”  He is correct.  Now he needs to build on that word – he needs to ask his supporters not only to go vote (which he is saying) but that they need to “move” into action to help “gently nudge” the good, decent, conservative Americans, who need that extra little reminder, to actually go vote.

He needs to stress the urgency of the situation.  Scare them with the facts – as he has been.  They are scared and they should be scared, and he should be upbeat.  He should explain that good, decent Americans, organizing and uniting for real political action where they live, with just a little bit of effort from millions of Americans, who probably have never made a GOTV phone call before, can win this election and finally take back our government and reverse the idiotic policies of the socialist, progressive Democrats now destroying our republic.

And he needs to explain that the two BEST places to unite and organize are at their local Republican Party monthly committee meeting and with the campaigns of the conservative candidates of their choice.

To be most effective, this message needs to come from Donald Trump himself.

He’s the candidate.  He’s the guy.  He’s the leader of his campaign.

I stand ready to provide more detail to the Trump Campaign.  I can make this happen.

Currently, our Party has about 400,000 precinct-level “voting member” slots, and only about 200,000 are filled.

Here is the sort of thing Donald Trump needs to say to every conservative audience:

I know many of you conservatives who have registered as Republican Party voters or identify as Republicans don’t believe I have any core conservative beliefs.

But here’s what I do know. And do advocate. Now.

First, we conservative Americans have to unite and organize to Get Out The Vote like never before if we are going to defeat the socialist Democrat nominee in November 2016.

Second, the best way for us conservatives to unite and organize to Get Out The Vote like never before to defeat the socialist Democrat nominee in November 2016 and the other Democrat candidates in all of the partisan races is to unite and organize inside a political party. A no brainer, right?  And that political party is, obviously, our party, the Republican Party. And I don’t just mean registering to vote as a Republican. I mean more than that. I mean finding your local Republican Party committee — they usually meet monthly — and going to its meeting and finding out how you can volunteer to become a voting member of the Party. In most states, that’s called becoming a “precinct committeeman.” Regardless of the name, by becoming one — and it’s pretty easy — you get to not only vote for the local and county Party officers, but you might also be able to vote to endorse candidates in the all-important, traditionally-very-low-turnout primary elections.

Anyone from the Party ever told you about this? Any other candidates in the presidential primary told you about this? Any of those RNC mailers you receive spell this out for you like I just did?  No?  Well, it’s about time somebody did, and I’m telling you now.

About half of these “voting slots” in the Party, nationwide, are vacant right now.  Again, has the Republican Party, the RNC, told you about this?!

And about one-third of the voting precincts in America have not even one Republican Party precinct committeeman slot filled. Not one. In about one third of the voting precincts in America, not one of these vital volunteer slots, to help Get Out The Vote and to be a liaison between the Republican voters in their precinct and the Party, is filled with a warm body.

In other words, we conservative Americans are going into battle against the Democrat Party, in our local precincts, at about half strength and with fully one third of our precincts having not even one Republican Party “boots on the ground” volunteer going door-to-door or making Get Out The Vote phone calls for our candidates.

This is mind-blowing!  Why won’t the RNC tell you about this?  Because they don’t want you!  They do not want you in their Party!

Don’t get mad, get even!

As I said, our Republican Party is at half strength. It’s at its weakest where it needs to be strongest. At the neighborhood level. The precinct level. We conservative Republicans must change that. Will you please attend your next local Republican Party committee meeting? To learn how to volunteer to get involved as a precinct committeeman? It only takes a couple of hours a month. Will you attend your meeting and learn how to help Get Out The Vote? Did you know that about 35% of registered Republicans did not bother to vote in the 2008 election that John McCain lost to President Obama by just 53 to 47 per cent?  We should have won that election!

I want to win the presidency.  For you.  For America.  To get our country back on track.  To Make America Great Again.

To Make America Great Again, we have to work together to keep it on the track of less government spending, less government regulation, and lower taxation.  Seal our border.  Repeal Obamacare.  Make our military strong again.  All that the Republican incumbents have failed to fight for.

“We the conservative people” need to re-energize the Republican Party with conservatives inside it. You will help me, no?  And help your country in the process?

We have to do this locally.  Together.  Neighbor-to-neighbor.  The best way to organize is via our own, respective, local Republican Party committees.

If we do it locally, we’ll win elections locally AND nationally!  It only takes two or three hours a month.  You can do this!  You MUST do this for your kids and your grandchildren!  Please do it for them.  And for my campaign.  Let’s Make America Great Again, together!

Please find your local committee and attend its meetings. You won’t be disappointed.

Thank you. And God bless America.


If Donald Trump can carry out parts one and two, then he has a shot of getting those 4 million or so conservatives – who refused to pull the lever for John McCain or Mitt Romney — to actually go vote for him.

But that is not enough.  Because he also has to increase the turnout of the “lower information, lower propensity” voters.  The BEST way to turn out those “voters in name only” and turn them into actual voters is with a personal contact – a personal phone call or knock at the door followed up with a personal drop at their door of an already-filled-out sample ballot they can use at the ballot box, and a short explanation about how important their vote truly is for a Trump victory.

This works.  I have done it in my precinct for the last three election cycles and am doing it again this year.  It’s just common sense.

Part Three:  Use the Best GOTV Software to Efficiently & Effectively GOTV

As for the third part, Donald Trump should deploy rVotes GOTV software in at least the battleground states.

The best way for a Republican state committee to deploy rVotes is to make it available to all Republican candidates (the candidates for the presidency, the state-wide, U.S House and Senate, and state legislature races and big city mayor candidates, would pay a sliding scale licensing fee; all PCs and “small” county and city candidates would get to use it for free or a nominal fee).  But if the state committee will not license it, the Trump campaign should license it for itself as it sees fit.

Using rVotes, Trump can then effectively and efficiently have the conservative Republican Party precinct committeemen, and his campaign volunteers, target the 35% or so of Republican and independent conservatives who fall into the “lower information, lower propensity” category and gently “nudge” them to go vote.  This is how Dave Brat beat the pants off of Eric Cantor in the 2014 primary.  Donald Trump can use this same strategy in the primary.  And again in the general.  If we conservatives, working together in our own precincts, just get 10% more of these “lower information, lower propensity” voters to the polls, our conservative candidates will win everywhere.  [Disclaimer:  I have no financial interest in rVotes.]

If Donald Trump follows this three-part Strategy, he’ll forever be known as the man who single-handedly inspired good, decent, conservative Americans to come to the aid of their country when they were needed by uniting and organizing politically.  Locally.  In their own voting precinct and on their own local Republican Party committee.

This Strategy is just basic American Civics in action.  Unfortunately, the progressives have been successful in getting real Civics out of the government schools.  When recruiting conservatives to become Republican precinct committeemen, the most common question I would get, even from some long-time Republican “activists,” was, “What’s a precinct committeeman?”  We conservatives need to change this.

Trump can make this Strategy happen.  And, thereby, win.

Thank you.

Dan Schultz

Daniel J. Schultz graduated from the United States Military Academy in 1978 and served as an Army Human Intelligence Officer.  He now practices law. He has been a Republican Party precinct committeeman since 2007 and was a co-winner of the Conservative HQ Liberty Prize based on his e-book Taking Back Your Government:  The Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy.  State-specific and other information relating to The Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy can be found at http://precinctproject.us and http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.comMr. Schultz can be reached at acoldwarrior@gmail.com


http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/24/ought-donald-trump-focus-on-getting-the-lower-propensity-voters-to-the-polls/feed/ 2 64257
All the News That’s Fit to Print http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/22/all-the-news-thats-fit-to-print/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/22/all-the-news-thats-fit-to-print/#comments Mon, 22 Aug 2016 13:33:00 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64254 The answer to every question begins with a unified theory, and the question today is just what are the forces arrayed against the American people today, and what role does the mainstream media play in it?

You see, we’d been wrong the past several years.

In 2012, we didn’t know about the extent of the GOP’s mutual relationship with the Democrats (what we call the Establishment). So, we doubled down in the midterms, handing the GOP everything it asked for, only to watch them cement their relationship with the Dems even stronger. But it has only been in the past twelve months, forced by the rise of Donald Trump (again, love him or hate him, he causes people to reveal their true selves) that the depth of that mutual relationship has been made crystal clear. The GOP-Democrat love-fest is so deep and intertwined that we can no longer consider this to be a simple fight between Right and the Left, considering that “the American left” now seems to be to the right of Mussolini.

With propagandists like Dr Goebbels at WAPO, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal, (even old-generation liberal Michael Goodwin, of the New York Post, has slammed the journalism of this modern media) and swine-like stand-up comedians at CNN, NBC and CBS, leading the charge, there is very little of the classical left in this new-and-improved world wide product. Joined by “conservative” Quislings, Saul Alinsky must be rolling over in his grave. Bernie Sanders tried to warn them.

Where is “the left” in the Left now that everyone knows that the cement that binds them all together is global capitalism?

With the unveiling of this corporate capitalism to anchor this relationship, the potential for another type of totalitarianism has been exposed, where party bosses and apparatchiks no longer have to pretend to share in the misery of the proletariat, having to live in 1000 sq foot apartments in three story walk-ups five days a week, then sneak off to dacha-retreats squirreled away in the woods, where they can finally settle down for a decent sirloin and instead of eating kielbasa and  corn soup on a coffee table in the living room. They can stretch their muscles, letting the media redefine just who the rich and famous really are.

The American left were always closet fascists, as were the Euro-technocrats since the Pax Americana settled over Europe in 1946 after we dispatched the cartoon fascists. Only they could never let themselves use that “f” word. It took 50 years for the delusion to become reality. (To better understand this, just conduct a deeper than usual study into the life of George Soros, a Hungarian Nazi from the old days, but also one of those rare “capitalists” who made billions of dollars without ever creating any new money, i.e., jobs, which had always sort of defined American capitalism. Soros’ is that rare strain of “capitalism” that is known by that singular characteristic of never actually building or creating anything other then more money.)

The opposite of George Soros is Donald Trump, a man who has built things. This is why, in the Latin world, he is known as “Mr Trump” – an honorific Americans understand less and less nowadays, and fascist Europeans like Soros, instinctively despise. No matter how much wealth they accumulate, they will always be “small businessmen” to fascists. They go together like oil and water, making this campaign almost cosmic.

This also answers the one question that has never been asked; Why is Donald Trump not one of “them” instead of leading the peoples’ army against “them”? Now you know.

All the News That’s Fit to Print

Now you can see the role the media plays, and is expected to play, in a war that can better be defined as People versus the Global State than Right vs Left.

The media aren’t just the ministers of propaganda, they were co-creators of Olympus.


One of those gods shown here represents the Sulzbergers, Time-Warner, and other corporate media giants. They are very powerful, and no, they don’t hang out with Dan Rather. But they are human and can be stung. Collectively, the people have cost them money, but rarely their standing in their own circles. Just by buying less newspapers, we’ve hurt the Sulzbergers immensely. Many Sulzberger heirs, who once could live well (read lavishly) on the dividends from their stock ownership in the company, now have had to go back to work. Were they English, they could lose their peerage, demoted from Sir of Dame to a mere Mister, (see my note on Trump, above.) I’m sure there are things they could do down at the polo club that could harm their good name among their circles of friends, but I doubt lying about Bush or Trump would be among them.

The principal product of propaganda is fear, not news.

And the targets of that fear, as mentioned in Part I, are 1) the members of Congress who we used to think were Republicans, only now are something else. And 2) by extension, the citizens who feel helpless while watching their elected representatives roll over for the media.

Again, love him or hate him, Donald Trump has provided the electorate with a model of a representative who can say “no” both to and about the media, proving it can be done successfully. The media is amassing all its forces to undo this, for they know the stakes. Trump has proved that the media cannot destroy what it did not create, for in truth, Donald Trump has not lost a single thing, except sleep, in the 14 months he has been campaigning. Nothing.

Circles of Friends

In 2013, I wrote an article about the way the various circles of friends at A&E colored the way its corporate and production people had to deal with the defiance of Phil Robertson of “Duck Dynasty.” You may recall the confrontation, and may still be cheered by the way Phil defeated a liberal network simply by saying “no.” I suggest you re-acquaint yourself with how these circles work.

I started out by relating the Japanese proverb that every person is made up of four persons: First is the person who is known to the public-at-large; Second; the person who is known in his professional and social world (friends and colleagues), Third; the person who is known to his closest friends and family, his inner circle, and Fourth; the person who is known only unto himself.

In the case of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, that first group is about as large as a group can get. And at first glimpse, they are almost equal in size. But they are very different in scope. Few of Hillary’s public-at-large are personally loyal to her, even those who self-identify with one of her sub-groups, such as Democrats and feminism. Trump’s loyalists are smoking hot in their enthusiasm, yet almost none have any personal connection to him, his wealth, flamboyance, or dress, although I think his stand-your-ground, take-no-prisoners approach to politics has a much broader appeal that many understand.

What differentiates the two groups is the nature of the bridge that connects them, Hillary’s being self-interest, special status, even elitism, while Trump’s bridge is America itself, wrapped up in the slogan “Make America great again.” In short, two entirely different world views.

Among what the Media like to call “quality-voters” – people who have been paying attention to the campaign rhetoric and politics for a longer while, way ahead of the post-Labor day curve, members of neither group is likely to jump the fence to the other side. The paying-attention vote is solid, well almost, for a lot of anti-Trump conservatives, in part because of what’s going on in their own second and third circles, (negative mail by ex-fans, fewer party invitations, cat-calls from the back of the line at the Will Call window at Turner Field) away from the eyes and ears of the media (these acts are often as private as prayer) are finding themselves drifting toward toning down the Trump rhetoric and coming out more vigorously Hillary. You see more and more of that.

But beneath the quality voters, who are relatively few, are the rank and file who historically never awaken to the fat-in-the-fire aspects of the campaign until late October. They are the ones mass media campaigns are supposed to capture. Here, it becomes more problematic for HRC, since every Democrat operative can recall 1980 when rank-and-fire union members still had those little red buttons; religion, patriotism, family, national security, that Ronald Reagan was able to push, and they quietly crossed over in droves, giving the Party even a bigger surprise than Truman gave to Dewey in ’48.

With that nightmare in mind, For over 30 years, Democrats and union leadership have years bundling those kinds of patriots off into sub-groups who would redirect those loyalties, or just out and out erase them via public schools. After all, first graders in the Reagan administration would be in their 40s now, and (at least the theory goes) should be entirely rewired today; no more Old Glory, God and other symbols of patriotism.

At least that’s the theory. The depth of enthusiasm for Trump has Democrats distraught – for none of their intermediate goals are materializing. Hillary is spending millions, Trump appears to be spending nothing, putting the entire corporatist cabal system at risk, of which the political establishment is but one element. No one, pollsters nor media (who are often the same) knows how large this second-quality vote might be or how many of them may also be Democrats. In 1980 the media only had a rumor of a notion that they even existed. Today, after 36 years, they still don’t know where or who they are, or how many there are.

In politics you can’t defeat what you can’t find and can’t count, and to date, the media has come up with nothing by way of lies and distortions that will diminish Donald Trump in the eyes of the common folk. And they’ve pretty well tried everything.

As you now know, the Mainstream Media belong to that Second Circle, which is where the majority of “quality voters” reside. I’ve spoken to dozens of professional people, mostly retired, mostly Fortune 500 corporate (people who don’t listen to daily talk radio, and probably only watch Fox in the evening). The only place it seems the media is gaining traction, sadly, even from my own conservative radio morning talk program, is with this group, by making Trump appear to be a buffoon, almost as if he won his $10 billion in a crap game instead of building skyscrapers. I have a few points I can make which might cause them to pause and reflect, for I stress how the term “Mister” tat is used frequently by Latinos to describe him, is held in such high honor, whereas in America today, corporate professionals, 2-3 generations beyond the original builders of their own companies, are taught to look down on people like that. I have to guide my canoe through that whitewater very carefully, for they are friends. But it is true…building a company from scratch is considered de class by the modern MBA, not to mention way too long on the hours, and way too short on near-term returns.  (I hope Trump knows he’s holding this card with Hispanics.)

But not to encourage Hillary or the Media, after the laugh-of-the-day at Trump’s expense, they get serious, and speak as if they can’t decide, only probably have, as they can’t find a good thing to say about her, or her Party. And most believe she should be on trial. Professional good sense tells them they shouldn’t vote for Trump, but honor tells them they can’t for Hillary. This is why men possess that Fourth Circle, to sort this out privately. And as often as not they never reveal it, even in the most intimate of Circle Two, pillow talk.

This is a variation of the “Wilder effect” which I believe is rampant in America today, for almost no one can speak too highly of a man who everyone in the room, probably exactly like him, think is a clown.

This is not good news for Hillary or the Media, for in all likelihood, good and honorable men will hold their own counsel and vote honor by a wide margin. Unless they’re lesbians.

It’s difficult to deal with the media individually, but Trump seems to be dealing pretty well with them collectively, in that, under that law (above) that they cannot destroy what they did not create, they cannot destroy Donald Trump.

With only 20% of the people even considering them relevant, including the entire political establishment, their greatest fear is that Trump will blaze a path whereby all the old markers of money, celebrity, a fear of political correctness, will begin fading among the political class. And Olympus will fall.

As well it should.

http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/22/all-the-news-thats-fit-to-print/feed/ 2 64254
Making the Media Irrelevant http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/19/making-the-media-irrelevant/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/19/making-the-media-irrelevant/#comments Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:22:03 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64243 (This will be in two parts, going from the general to the sublime. Tune in midweek for Part II, “All the News That’s Fit to Print”)

The title is something of a misnomer, in that the mainstream media is largely irrelevant already, and while a lot of people would like to credit Donald Trump for this  slide, it has actually been heading in that direction for many years.

I can’t say exactly when the American people’s romance with the media began its decline, but it was a phony romance from  the beginning. Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist Paper 84 announced that a “freedom of the press” clause in the proposed Bill of Rights was unnecessary, believing that common law concerning libel and defamation were quite satisfactory in restraining excesses by the press.

The people saw their press (media) as a source of news, a type of community bulletin board (in fact, that’s how many got their news all the way into the 1940s).

Headlines posted in street-corner window of newspaper office (Brockton Enterprise). Brockton, Massachusetts, December 1940. Reproduction from color slide. (Photo by Jack Delano. Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)

Headlines posted in street-corner window of newspaper office (Brockton Enterprise). Brockton, Massachusetts, December 1940. Reproduction from color slide. (Photo by Jack Delano. Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress)

A majority of the People were never interested in the opinions of the editor (1760-2016), only maybe around election time. And then, his opinion mattered only to the extent that he had been faithful in writing the news accurately and objectively the other 49 weeks of the year.

There’s a thought process involved there that really has never wavered over the 228 years of our existence. Over time the newspaper evolved from a pamphlet sized leaflet that could be hung on fence post to multi-page affair, with a page of national news, covering wars, disasters, etc, gathered by wire services, to a section that covered only local news (metro) gathered by local beat reporters, to sports news, from the Yankees to the high school Cardinals, a page of the all-important obituaries and legal notices from the courthouse, even a comic section for the kids. Only larger city papers had a business section, usually showing up in the Sunday edition. And finally, near the back, there was a page of opinions by the editor, and later, syndicated journalists, including a section for local letter writers to vent their disappointment or anger at the local mayor, another letter writer, the owners of Joe’s Tire Emporium for selling leaky recaps and finally that editor himself, who was almost always a scalawag and a mountebank.

No section of the newspaper was read by all the people. Everyone read the headlines of the front page, and for many, that was their news for the day, or week, unless they turned on the radio at 6 (once that became a national habit during World War II) or visited the Bijou regularly, where, from the 1920s into the 60s, there was Movietone News, which is how most kids got their first glimpse of the D-Day invasion fleet, MacArthur coming ashore in the Philippines, or the greatest bevy of bathing suit-clad beauties from Hollywood.

Few people actually followed the details of a front-page story back to where it was concluded on page 7. Fewer than 20% ever turned to the Editorials, and those were usually the upper echelons of the city’s business and political community.

This newspaper format was a big stretch from the colonial days, because they wanted to be able to reach a much broader spectrum of the population out there in order to make a profit, which they did thru advertising (Joe’s Tire Emporium) plus a small surcharge to subscribers which covered home delivery. Statewide papers even used the mails. Their life’s-blood was advertising. Without advertising newspaper owners couldn’t even pay for the ink.

Trust me on this, it has only been in recent years, in our lifetime, that the average American has given a hoot in hell about what was going on in Washington DC. And therein lies the tale of separation between the American people and the modern media. It was forced upon them.

All the people ever wanted was “the news”, which was and always has been, local. Everything else was just a fleeting headline, barely even a topic of conversation, unless a war was on..

So, in all other areas of their lives the media (the press) were irrelevant, only by the 1960s this situation had become intolerable to the television wing of national media.

It was the people’s access to news the Founders wanted to protect and foster, a “free-market press”. It was for readers to decide what, or how much of what the media wrote was trustworthy or even interesting. What the Founders feared was a state-run press, which like a state religion, the people found repugnant.

From the 1960s forward, newspaper readership fell. Slowly at first, then drastically. It was mostly about money, shrinking advertising dollars, because people were getting their news first from national radio, then television networks. The reasons were simple, optics and speed. Even before television, and the need for speed in getting news from the theaters of the war, radio networks (only two in those days) proved to be as much as a day faster in getting war news to families gathered around the radio every evening at 6. Unlike the newspapers, that news was without editorial comment, and sounded more sophisticated and objective. Listeners never imagined in their minds eye network broadcasters with bow ties, rolled up shirts sleeves and a big cigar chompeing in the corner of their mouth. Some probably even thought Douglss Edwards wrote his own stuff.

For four years this image of a bipartisan, above-the-fray, honest but neutral reportage settled into a whole generation of Americans, and was an image the national networks hoped to foster, as a class of news journalists a cut above the stogie-chewers down at the city desk in Baltimore.

FDR introduced Big Government 2.0 in 1932 and it needed an advertising agency. Whether by design or by happenchance (a little of both in those early radio years, I suspect) the networks was that medium, but  it would take a few years for that metamorphosis to take place, for you see, the specter of rising communism, the Red Scare, made the people less trustworthy of the media. The media was all-in for America when the enemy was fascism, but we’re all still waiting for the New York Times to say something unkind about Stalin, or CBS about Mao, Ho Chi Minh or Fidel Castro, or NBC Islamic jihad, or Obama-Clinton all of the above.

This did not go unnoticed so while Truman squeaked by in ’48 with the help of the national media, what happened next was the Cold War.

Some also called these the Ike Years, 1952-1960, when the national media returned to be as irrelevant as it had been since Lincoln.

National television news was still a 15-minute-a-day family routine, not much different from that radio routine during the war. John Cameron Swayze came on every evening and sat at a desk almost as empty as Obama’s in the Executive Office, and read the daily news in a monotone voice for fifteen minutes, then signed off.  His sponsor was Camel cigarettes, and he was considered the “television voice of the Korean War”.

This was when network television was at it most credible.


CAMEL NEWS CARAVAN — Pictured: News anchor John Cameron Swayze (center) — Photo by: NBCU Photo Bank

But it was also boring. CBS with Douglas Edwards was just as stem-winding and America snored in the minds of New York ad-men. Ike was boring and Washington was the furthest thing in the peoples’ minds. Moveitone News was the sexiest news show in America. There were no on-site reports from the war in Korea (Ike ended it without a single riot or student protest). No one reported from Washington, London or Paris, not even the golf course at Gettysburg.

In 1960, the national media needed a rescue, and found a new power by being able to bring about the election of a charismatic, debonair, but philandering, John Kennedy over a pasty-looking, dull Dick Nixon, simply by keeping the American voters in the dark about JFK’s liaisons. Several cardinal rules of journalism and politics had been broken, lines crossed. for the media had never intentionally misled people with malice aforethought as they did in 1960. And they got away with it. JFK was so handsome that the Democrats even got away with stealing the Chicago vote, and hence the election.

The network media learned two important lessons: First, as P T Barnum opined, “There’s a sucker born every minute” for they were able to keep all stories of JFK’s philandering out of the public eye..the kind of success we’ve seen reprised for Bill Clinton (sex), Obama (chronic lying and incompetence) and Hillary in a multitude of criminal acts. And second, the media learned that the new generation, (Baby Boomers who saw JFK as a god) could be conditioned to see Washington as The Source of all good things, So, from 1963 on, they could ride the backs of my father’s generation, who had given them street cred because of the war, while turning their children into a kind of min-numbed robot, with all eyes turned toward Washington. The media were in total charge of what people saw and how they saw it.

Turning half those children into antiwar protesters, where the brightest went one way and the best the other, they made their first claim of ownership in the enterprise that was about to unfold.

So, it was no problem at all to launch Big Government 3.0 with LBJ’s Great Society, which has turned out to be one of the greatest criminal acts (much worse than slavery) plus trillion dollar Ponzi scheme, ever devised in modern world history.

The rest, I suppose is history, for the natural inclinations of men like Salant and Friendly at CBS was to seize new territory by creating networks (circles) of friends inside government and the news industry. The elixir of power. In the process they would eventually, partly by opportunity, but also by lustful disposition, abandon both “the people” and “the truth” for whom the Bill of Rights protected them to protect….a process we can now see among similarly situated young conservatives who have tasted that same elixir. A potent brew.

(One of the ironies with the rise of Donald Trump and his attempts to re-institute the irrelevance of the national media, has been the reaction of a conservative for-profit satellite industry to the same media establishment they are suppose to want to see diminished, but to whom they vowed undying allegiance in order to insure that Donald Trump loses for fear he may actually succeed in this attempt to return the press and the national capital, to its original position in the Constitutional scheme.Go figure.)

So, the media had gone from irrelevant in the 1950s to co-equals with the political class by the mid-70s, at the same time seeing their standing with the American people, who today, alternately pay no attention to them at all or don’t believe when they do read or see them. (Count me among the latter.) fall off the charts.

Consider: During the Reagan Administration, against whom the media stood shoulder-to-shoulder, with the same solidarity they did Civil Rights, the Vietnam War, the innocence of Michael Brown and lately, a first-grader’s right to declare his/her own sex…(Notice the declining importance of the issue over 50 years?), in polling questions, “gets facts straight” the media had fallen below 50% among Americans, while “deals fairly with all sides” was never above 35%, and is today hovering around 20%.

The MSM had become the least respected and, to the lives of about 80% of the American population, the least relevant, at the same, 1992,  it had acquired all its power from the other 20%.

It had become “Hollywood for the ugly”, which Paul Begala once used to refer to Washington in general.

So yes, of course, we have a “state media” today, only it would be difficult to say it is “state-controlled”, which implies a subordinate position to the government. America’s media is part of the ruling class. It is one of the helmsmen guiding the national ship, and unless the people and politicians who really want to defeat the power of the media, don’t understand this,  they will never understand the full arsenal the media has at their disposal to protect their turf.

Making the Media Irrelevant…Again

Donald Trump has moved several steps in this direction, having stripped the media of almost every vestige of pretend objectivity which for fifty years it has been able to think about itself.

In the eyes of the people the media is already pretty much irrelevant. If all the people, not just 80%, turned off all their television, computers, including Drudge, Limbaugh, Twitter, Facebook, the media would continue to go, like a spacecraft lost in space, until it ran out of fuel and food. It’s ability to think itself relevant even in an empty void, is almost endless.

If you are looking for ways to defeat them (and that requires teams of bright minds) you must understand this estimation of themselves. and the very personal signals they receive when they know the jig is up. Consider Brian Williams and Dan Rather, both of whom refuse to admit, even to themselves, that they have become irrelevant, or that they did it to themselves. Their circled of power is only partially destroyed.

The media’s three strengths are 1) the power it has to raise politicians up in the public’s eye, thereby reserving unto itself the attendant power, to destroy them, 2) the fear the public-at-large still has for the illusion of a greater power in the media than it actually possesses, and 3) its full fledged membership in the aims and ambitions of what we once thought was simply the Left, but now know to be a much broader ruling class, made up of not only leftwing ideologues, but also power-hungry politicians of no particular ideology except the one that keeps them in power and protects their rank. (This single belief kept the feudal system alive for a thousand years, if you’re looking for a yardstick as to what this cabal thinks about itself, or what it can do.) The introduction of a capitalist element into this consortium gives it all the earmarks of a genuine fascist oligarchy, where any specific political philosophy is secondary, held closely only to a few of its members. (This explains how the editors at RedState can so comfortably and guiltlessly sleep with the Clinton campaign.)

We will deal with how to deal with this: Next,  Part II, All the News That’s Fit to Print

http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/19/making-the-media-irrelevant/feed/ 1 64243
Of Nuclear Wars, Founding Charters, Guns and ‘What Ifs’ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/19/of-nuclear-wars-founding-charters-guns-and-what-ifs/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/19/of-nuclear-wars-founding-charters-guns-and-what-ifs/#comments Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:43:47 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64221 John Yoojeremy rabkin

Author’s note: I am a nobody. I never amounted to a bean, let alone a hill of them. About a decade ago as I began to age perceptibly, I discovered the Internet. Not “discover” in the sense that Albert the Magnificent discovered it, but I noticed it was there and had utility for my purpose, which at the time was to reactivate long-dormant brain cells. After a while, I discovered that not only could you find out darned near anything on the World Wide Web, you could reach out and engage nearly anybody.
One of the people I engaged was professor Jeremy Rabkin, of George Mason University, a noted scholar. He was kind enough to endure the engagement and I chatted with him off-and-on for a year or so about subjects that I was interested but not sufficiently schooled in, such as national sovereignty for example. I bought his book and he explained some things and then I found other avenues and he started work on a new book and I didn’t want to bother him, so the engagement lapsed. I will be forever grateful for his civility.




Not content to inform us medium-information types that salvaging a functioning Supreme Court majority was insufficient grounds to vote for Donald J. Trump, John Yoo and Jeremy Rabkin go at least an extra mile in their latest offering and tell us that some other things we had previously held dear might not be worth putting on a red ball cap with a ‘nationalist’ message on it either.

In the second installment of their “No good reason to vote Trump” lecture series, Yoo and Rabkin further expound on why, apparently, since we don’t know what Trump might actually do as President, or what the other institutions of government might do in response, it is better to pass on his candidacy. Here is a relevant …and disturbing ….passage….

“Perhaps we should admire that level of devotion to the Constitution. But we have a stronger preference for avoiding nuclear war. We also want to avoid trade wars and the end of American alliances that are decades old. In short, we are unwilling to entrust our nation’s foreign and security policy to a Trump administration.”

So, if you digested Yoo and Rabkin’s first lecture and were not sufficiently shocked that these “constitutional” and legal scholars didn’t put a premium on reconstituting the Supreme Court, well how does putting “avoiding a nuclear war” over preserving the physical and spiritual foundation for the existence of the United States of America, as reflected in it’s charter, grab you?

More on this ‘avoiding nuclear war’ business later, but you don’t have to be an academic to understand that a real live nuclear war, between nuclear powers, would be a catastrophic event. On the other hand, you also don’t have to be a rocket scientist to intuitively know that should the Constitution of the United States not survive, there is no guarantee that the United States itself, one of the surest, by virtue of both might and right, insurance policies against nuclear conflagration, would survive to serve as a deterrent against the very thing these gentlemen rate atop their list.

Oh, yes, and they caution against trade wars and the loss of “old alliances”, among other things. “The Constitution? Meh. But let’s hear it for trade and alliances!”…………..What?

If you analyze this article for the verbiage, you will find that it is filled with so many hypotheticals, it becomes somewhat comedic. It is rife with things like “If; what if; might; suppose; perhaps;’Will the Court?’; and so many other predicates it begins to sound less like a scholarly assessment and more like a traditional negative campaign ad. So there’s that.

And the kicker for many of us already on edge about what the Democratic State Socialist Party of America has in mind for us out here who think the Bill of Rights, in terms of Shalt Nots is second only to the Ten Commandments, is what John Yoo and Jeremy Rabkin write about the sacred Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

“But what if Hillary’s appointees overturn the handful of conservative victories of the past decade? That will be sad. We think the Court would err, for example, if it were to reverse its recent cases holding that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to own firearms. But it may not be better, in the long term, to “save” such rulings under a Court identified with Trump.”

And with that, fellow patriots, there are no more straws left. Too bad, so sad if your precious RKBA goes away when Hilly puts her judges in there, but the esteemed gentlemen don’t think it advisable for you to have a Trump Court to save your rights for you because ….like….long term ….and stuff.

Good grief.


In the prologue above I alluded to my admiration for Professor Rabkin. John Yoo also held a special place in my heart for his role in legitimizing the necessary means to keep America and Americans safe via the “enhanced interrogation” methods used by our government vis-a-vis the Islamic terrorists. So that you can imagine my dismay upon reading the twisted logic, anti-constitutionalism and made-up situational ethics they utilized to characterize the Donald Trump candidacy as a threat to……to what? Not to America. They don’t care about America, they care about “free trade” and Peace at any price and hypothetical scenarios for the sake of a jolly good argument, we suppose. Rabkin’s passionate arguments of the past for nations and the attendant national sovereignty that goes with the concept of nations apparently fade into insignificance for him when faced with the possibility of an America-Firster as president. I cannot understand this. Except to possibly reconcile it with the knowledge that in addition to being a Professor of things related to Law, he accepted in 2007 a position on the Board of Directors of the….United States Institute for Peace. I know nothing more than that fact and I wholeheartedly agree that, whenever possible, peace should be….given a chance. But my dismay, disheartenment and disgruntlement at what I am hearing from influential people these days is peptic. Maybe I would have, in the face of what is being disseminated these days by the likes of Yoo and Rabkin and Michael Hayden, which I highlighted the other day, been better off to just let those brain cells rest comfortably.

http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/19/of-nuclear-wars-founding-charters-guns-and-what-ifs/feed/ 1 64221
Oregon’s Kitzhaber Comes Out from Hiding http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/17/oregons-kitzhaber-comes-out-from-hiding/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/17/oregons-kitzhaber-comes-out-from-hiding/#comments Wed, 17 Aug 2016 22:01:14 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64217 Disgraced former Oregon governor, John Kitzhaber, is attempting a big comeback. In February 2015 he was forced to resign amid influence peddling allegations and a federal criminal probe investigating both Kitzhaber and his fiancée, Cylvia Hayes. After going underground for a while, he recently started posting videos on his Facebook page questioning his decision to resign and making multiple public appearances expressing his opinions on the state of healthcare reform in Oregon. According to an interview with Oregon Public Broadcasting, Kitzhaber has plans to use his 26 years of public service and four successful runs for governor to establish a lucrative consulting business.

However, just as Kitzhaber tries to re-enter public life he has been hit with a lawsuit dragging him right back to his past transgressions. His former communications director, Nkenge Harmon Johnson, claims her employment was terminated when she sought legal counsel after being instructed to work on Kitzhaber’s re-election campaign rather than state business. Harmon Johnson’s lawsuit also claims a state Justice Department investigator spied on her husband and performed a “threat assessment” on him as retaliation for her complaints against the governor.

Harmon Johnson’s lawsuit has named Kitzhaber, Hayes, his former chief of staff Mike Bonetto, and state Justice Department investigator James Williams. The lawsuit states that each week Kitzhaber’s campaign advisors held an in-person meeting with his executive staff. Additionally, the campaign advisors frequently corresponded with the Governor’s executive staff, senior policy advisors and senior employees at Cover Oregon via telephone conference calls, emails, and texts. Harmon Johnson witnessed what she reasonably believed were “myriad improprieties involving the Governor’s re-election campaign team and his official staff, including, but not limited to, directing or permitting of political activities by public employees while on the job in violation of ORS 260.432, as well as mismanagement and abuse of authority.” Harmon Johnson has also stated that she was directed by Bonetto and Kitzhaber to work with the campaign team and illegally tailor her official duties around the needs of the Governor’s campaign.

According to the lawsuit, Harmon Johnson was expected to manage communications, appearances, and events for Kitzhaber’s fiancee Cylvia Hayes. These duties not only included Hayes’ activities related to her capacity as the administration’s energy advisor but that of her personal interests and outside businesses. When Harmon Johnson first expressed her concerns that the lines were being inappropriately crossed she came under fire from Hayes at an executive staff meeting. Harmon Johnson believes this conflict with Hayes started a series of disparaging statements to other high ranking people, including the Kitzhaber and Bonetto, leading to the instigation of her termination.

The blurring of official lines is nothing new for this administration. Kitzhaber and Hayes are currently involved in an 18-month long investigation involving charges of influence peddling and conflict of interests. No charges have been filed yet but, claims have been made that Hayes used her positions as the administration’s energy advisor and fiancée of the Governor to unfairly influence state energy policies. During her time as energy advisor, Hayes was a paid as a consultant by multiple special interest groups looking to buy influence. She and Kitzhaber have been accused of illegally profiting from their government positions. In April 2015 current Oregon Governor, Kate Brown, released 94,000 emails between Hayes and Kitzhaber’s staff. Many of the emails showed how entrenched Hayes was in every aspect of the administration. In the emails, there were numerous examples of state employees taking direction from Hayes on matters of Kitzhaber’s policies.

The emails also showed the same types of conflicts Harmon Johnson alleged in her lawsuit. Executives of the state’s healthcare exchange, CoverOregon, worked with both Hayes and the Governor’s campaign team. The state exchange was another complete debacle for the Kitzhaber administration. The state of Oregon was given $305 million to establish a healthcare exchange. Rife with malfeasance and misappropriation of funds the decision to close down CoverOregon came before its one year anniversary. Some of the 94,000 emails document the administration’s decision that the healthcare program’s mismanagement could hurt the Governor’s fourth run for office, so it was ended to keep it from becoming a campaign issue. The $305 million taxpayer loan was just gone and no one, including Kitzhaber, had an explanation for it. The evidence clearly shows the ultimate decision to kill the state exchange was solely political.  The failure of the exchange had become an anvil around his neck and he was sinking in the polls.

With the legacy, Kitzhaber and his cronies have left behind it is absurd to think that he should be given any legitimacy on the public stage. His time in public service should serve as nothing more than a cautionary tale of what can go horribly wrong when self-serving people are elected to positions of power and have millions of dollars to spend however they wish.


http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/17/oregons-kitzhaber-comes-out-from-hiding/feed/ 1 64217
America Needs Its Sing-Along Song Back http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/15/america-needs-its-sing-along-song-back/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/15/america-needs-its-sing-along-song-back/#comments Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:02:30 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64208 (With thanks to our friend, EPU, for suggesting this title in a 2012 article.)

“God Bless America” was written by Irving Berlin in 1918, and revived in 1938 with war looming, and made famous by Kate Smith, whose 1938 radio rendition was a national hit. (See if you can spot Ronald Reagan. If  you’re over 60, hankies are optional.)

A prayer actually, written by a Jew, really, you can imagine why it has fallen out of favor with the modern anti-religious in-crowd these days, the new capitalist-globalists sheepishly tagging along to keep their meal tickets intact.

Interestingly, and why this should be of interest to people both encouraged and threatened by the enthusiasm levels of Trump crowds today,  is that an amateur led a singing of this song at this soccer match several years ago, and this is what happened next.

Glenn Beck once commissioned a batch of songs to be written by some pretty well known artists, and played them for several weeks as promos to an event he was sponsoring.

Now, not to demean the writer-performers, or the classic “God Bless the USA” by Lee Greenwood (from which they all seemed to be derived)  they were sappy. I sort of wish Lee had broken the mold after he recorded that song, for those songs pointed to the problem I’m talking about here. They all seemed directed at people who would more likely hold hands around a campfire before turning in, vespers, than march off to face down union thugs on the National Mall, humming “This Land is Your Land” which Woody Guthrie wrote in 1939 because he didn’t like the religious overtones of “God Bless America”. Tne left coopted my genre, folk music, in the 1960s the very same way, sending that generation off into a drugged up stupor either singing “Kumbaya” or “In a Gadda Da Vida”.

I can’t see anyone standing on their tippy-toes and bellowing out a chorus of any of those songs at a sporting event, or whistling the refrain while walking down the street…except maybe past a graveyard.

We have solemn patriotic hymns out the wazoo. What we don’t have, and need, are rousing songs of unity…with a kick. Songs which say “Clear the room and I’ll fight ye all, I’m so damned proud of who I am.”

Believe it or not, the National Anthem used to be that way, for it was one of the few songs we all hear while gathered in a large assembly some place. We were first taught it in school, along with “My Country Tis of Thee”, “American the Beautiful” and those songs were even in the Methodist Hymnal, which we’d sing every Memorial Day Sunday. (not sure Methodists still do that.) And back in the day, everyone sang it, they just didn’t listen to the Marching Tiger Band play it at the 50-yard line.

I’ve always been jealous of the East Europeans, who stopped loving their country while under communism, so instead loved the Rodina, their mythical Motherland, Narodna, doubly so. They seemed to have a whole battery of songs everyone knew, from great grandpa down to the kindergartners, none of them showing any hesitation in singing along whenever the occasion posed itself.

When a whole roomful of patrons in a restaurant can break into a folk song everyone knew, the words didn’t matter, it was patriotic just by their singing it together. The act itself was patriotic. I puffed up just watching it. It could have been “Roll Me Over in the Clover” for all I know (another one I’m sure you all know) and it wouldn’t have mattered, especially when sung in Serbian. Who can forget when the French broke into “La Marseillaise” in Rick’s Cafe in “Casablanca” singing down the Germans’ Yiddish version of “Der Fuhrer’s Face?”

When I was growing up we knew popular songs from three generations back, although, for the life of me I can’t say why. Why did my mother (born 1924) sing songs from the Gay 90’s? Was it Mitch Miller? The radio? Even as the music business was being divided up into age brackets with the advent of radio, phonograph records and the juke box, these old songs had legs well into the 1960s.

We don’t have that anymore, and with kids walking around strapped to ear-phones (not the other way around) we aren’t likely to. I can go to YouTube and watch/hear all the great rousing moments in music, as I’ve just shared with you here (above), and share vicariously with the crowd as they stand and sing, send it my friends, and get back all the oooohhh’s and aaahhhh’s, but in the end, from the listener’s point of view, it’s still a solo event. There is no shared history from yesterday, nor any expectation of a shared history tomorrow. There is no fraternal exchange that transcends, carrying today over into tomorrow.

Helluva way to build a culture, with no shared history.

Since the Democrats haven’t come up with a national fight song that the LGBT or BLM will approve, and since the corporatist-capitalists have come over to their side, they can’t even drudge up all the “Joe Hill” union songs of old, that Bernie used to sing around the campfire.

But we have one, and maybe one more generation to pass it on.

Maybe Trump could find a spirited version and put it on YouTube. Kids understand enthusiasm better than most words anyway. And enthusiasm is always catching.


http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/15/america-needs-its-sing-along-song-back/feed/ 4 64208
Is This What Passes For Intelligence? http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/11/is-this-what-passes-for-intelligence/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/11/is-this-what-passes-for-intelligence/#comments Fri, 12 Aug 2016 02:07:54 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64185 Ladies and Gentlemen, it’s so much worse than you thought. There is an entity known as the Central INTELLIGENCE Agency, and of late, several of it’s Directors have indicated by their comments and activities that our vetting process for CIA directors needs some serious study.

You will recall that former Director Leon Panetta once famously testified to Congress that he had no idea who the “rebels” were in Libya. And wasn’t it just a momentary lapse in judgement that caused Director David Petraeus to share his files with his illicit lover (Yes, a compound calumny)? Somehow Petraeus got picked to head CIA even AFTER he stood on the battlefield in Afghanistan and said the reason his troops were being targeted was because of the comments of a preacher back in the United States.

Well, Obama’s questionable deftness in pickin’em is not the only problem here. We also have former Director Michael Hayden coming out with a few gems of his own very recently. Hayden……served….as Director during the G.W. Bush administration. This is what he said about Donald Trump’s remarks on Hillary Clinton’s predictably disastrous stacking of the Supreme Court should she prevail:

The former head of the CIA, retired Gen. Michael Hayden, told CNN’s Jake Tapper: “If someone else had said that said outside the hall, he’d be in the back of a police wagon now with the Secret Service questioning him.”
US Secret Service communications director Cathy Milhoan told CNN the agency “is aware of Mr. Trump’s comments.”
Hayden added: “You’re not just responsible for what you say. You are responsible for what people hear.”

Got that? If Donald Trump says, which he did:”Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know,” then Trump did NOT say anything about assassination, or violence, or make a threat of any kind and no, Hayden, the Secret Service would not have me, or you or anyone else in the back of a police wagon for saying “Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.” And you beclown yourself by making that assertion.

Michael Hayden is one of the “Gang of 50” supposedly Republican, supposedly conservative “security experts” who have vowed not to support the Donald Trump presidential bid, in fact to actively oppose it.
He adds this nice touch to his Trump- bashing dialogue with Jake Tapper:

“You get to a certain point in this business, you’re not just responsible for what you say, you’re responsible for what people hear. And that might be a good lesson for him.”

You’re responsible for ‘what people hear‘? Really?? Well, golly, that surely lets a whole bunch of people off the hook for their actions, doesn’t it? The President, or a candidate for president, speaks to 320 million Americans and billions more world-wide and he/she is responsible for what each one of them hears? Good grief.

And it doesn’t stop there with this genius Hayden, who famously said last winter that people in the intelligence community would refuse to use waterboarding interrogation techniques if the commander-in-chief ordered them. Yes, this is the guy who was director of the National Security Agency from 1999-2005 and then of the CIA from 2006-2008, during which period all of the waterboarding under president G.W. Bush took place. Give me a break.

But perhaps the most disingenuous thing, the most repugnant thing, and the stupidest thing in the way of justification for his atttack on Trump is this:

TAPPER: You said he would be a national security threat?

HAYDEN: I think he will be quite dangerous. He does not seem to have a curiosity, does not seem to have a willingness to learn. Look, listen to the people in that letter, Jake. We’ve been saying these things for three or four months. But I think we all we all the hope, you know, at a certain point in this process, you being to tact to the middle, you begin to make more fact-based presentations, you talk to experienced people. You begin to adopt some knowledge about how the world works. And we haven’t seen that. We haven’t seen that at all. And so, we all kind of decided that that is just not going to happen. And since we don’t expect it to happen, we felt duty-bound to issue, frankly, a warning. That if he governs, the way he talks as a candidate, and again, we have seen no evidence that he won’t, he would be quite a danger to American and global security.

Donald Trump would be a danger to American and global security? Do you know what a double negative is? It is this – “We have seen no evidence that he won’t”. Two negatives make a positive, meaning that Hayden believes Trump will do what he said he would do on the campaign trail….

Which is the following_

1.Strengthen the US Military.
2.Maintain and enforce the borders of the United States.
3.Stop unvetted immigration into the United States, with a temporary ban on admittance to the US of people from Muslim countries or from countries which are hotbeds of terrorist activities and a ban of presumed “refugees” until a proper vetting regime can be imposed.
4.Destroy ISIS.
5.Renegotiate the workings of NATO to reflect 21st century realities and to insure members contribute their fair share of the costs/burdens.

Those are things that Donald Trump has actually proposed. And while all candidates for the presidency make proposals or issue principles by which they would govern and there is no guarantee that any of them will be implemented verbatim, what part of any of Trump’s proposals are a danger to American or global security? None of it. Hayden didn’t even address any of those proposals in his rant with Jake Tapper. He merely played on the verbiage Trump used as regards the Hillary Supreme Court pick affair and what could be done to stop her.

So Hayden, and all who join him in raving about the “danger” posed by Donald Trump, are doing so not from their positions as ‘security experts’, but as purveyors of the same sensationalist pap that CNN and the other networks and far too many “mainstream commentators” have glommed onto.

This is the exemplar of the “50 national security experts” who warn about Trump. They fear for our country. Not for anything Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton did in the preceeding eight years. Not for the pathetic state of the Middle East, Africa and Western Europe. Not for the increased terror attacks already extant in these United States. No, they fear what a plain speaking, crude-talking America-Firster might do as president. Horrors! Why, who knows! He might even patch things up with Israel! We can’t have that, now can we?

Just how ‘intelligent’ is this former CIA Director? Or perhaps a better question would be ….just how patriotic is he? Because anybody who would utter crass political jingoisms, reiterate the Mainstream Media’s and the Clinton Campaign’s talking points and speak in double negatives and place the quality of rhetoric above the substance of national security issues either has his head or his heart, or both, in the wrong place.

One thing for sure, General Hayden. Hillary appreciates your service ….these days.

http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/11/is-this-what-passes-for-intelligence/feed/ 3 64185
A Letter for the Lost; Modern Atheists http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/10/a-letter-for-the-lost-modern-atheists/ http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/10/a-letter-for-the-lost-modern-atheists/#comments Wed, 10 Aug 2016 20:19:49 +0000 http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/?p=64169 Blaise Pascal(1623-62), the French mathematician, inventor and philosopher, said, and I paraphrase,

There are three kinds of people: Those who are found, those who are not found but seeking to be found, and those who are lost not knowing they are lost. The first are happy and rational, the second are unhappy but rational, while the third, the Lost, are unhappy and foolish.

I am writing this Letter only to the Lost.

To the Lost: America was designed to be a nation of individuals who can find their own way.

If you don’t believe this statement to be true, and these days most of you don’t, then you have not really bought into that whole “liberty” thing that supports the Constitution.

However, this letter is not designed to point out the differences between a nation of individuals and a nation of collectivists, but rather point out the complete emptiness of the notion that individual liberty can coexist with state-run tests that determine one’s fitness for full citizenship. It has to be one or the other.

Those of you who believe this way are lost.

You will soon have to decide whether to go all-in for the State or quietly retreat into a real world of critical thinking and inquiry. I’ve even provided a model and a path.

Inadequately educated in the laws of logic, but also deeply indoctrinated in the arts of self-gratification and entitlement, you allow yourselves to believe that you can still be a (little “d”) democrat while driving toward a tyrannical state made up, as had been the case worldwide for 5000 years, of a 10% ruling class, a 20% management class, and a 70% drone class, whose only role in life is to attend to the care and comfort of the upper 30%. America, by its very existence, had changed all that, and someone has convinced you it would be a better idea to destroy it and return us to those good old days, probably under the mistaken notion that you will be a member of management.

(Now, to the broader audience) The Lost have always been among us. In earlier essays I’ve referred to them as “don’t give a damns” who, until they became America’s only protected religious class, accounted for no more than perhaps 10% of the population. Now they are a growth industry, public schools and college courses dedicated to their incubation, now much larger and completely alien to America as designed, but with real political power.

In that vein, I’m not entirely speaking about “the Lost” here in the same manner Pascal was, for he was speaking of those who had not found God, while I’m describing as lost those who no longer believe in the virtue of Liberty, which is what the Constitution was all about. Freedom, not religion.

However, there is a point of interconnectedness between God and Liberty in America’s original design, and that is found in the reciprocity and common morality that existed between all free Americans so that our ship could always sail with fair winds at our back, and deep waters under our hull.

Without these winds and deep waters America is just another nation, like any other nation, and would navigate the same turbulent waters of history which always have sunk every top-down government since the Pharaohs. I have argued this with scientific certainty in the past, where ironically Darwin and God also intersected at about the same point.

Historically there have always been, from the very beginning, at home and abroad, attempts to steer America away from the fair havens of freedom and back into the storm-tossed waters of incessant war, privation, and tyranny.

Today Christianity is a prime target of those forces, in part because it is always handy, but also because the timing seems right, especially to a generation of intemperants who have been spoon-fed for years that almost every roadblock that has been laid in their path, every form of disapproval, from a solid “No” to a simple furrowed-brow look of disapproval, are all types of aggression aimed at them by invisible straw men called “Christians.” And those aggressions have at their heart only one objective; to blight the paths and darken the skies of what we are coming to know as the self-described smarter set in virtually every high school and college class, aka Modern Atheists.

Modern Atheism is a form of dressed-up academic teat-fittery.

Modern Atheism causes none of these things to happen, by the way, which is way above its pay level. Lenin had a name for the role these people play, “useful idiots.” The MA movement is simply a haven for all the graduates of their finishing schools, to give a more academic legitimacy and justification for what may some day befall Christians, much as the academic, legal and medical professions did in the Reich years, by sending Jews off to the camps in an orderly and legal process so that the rest of the nation would see these things as a natural advance of human civilization. All very scientific.

While I understand the long term plan and the nature of the Enemy who has devised this broader plan, it is at a totally different level that I am insulted by the advocates of Modern Atheism, who stand as spokespeople for an intellectual perspective more like Curly, Moe and Larry might have for fascism than Socrates and Thrasymachus might have for good government.


Fact: The waters America’s ship sails upon are not Christian. It’s the atheists who insist they are, which goes some to prove their lack of intellectual curiosity or personal knowledge about the subject from the outset. MA’s have built a philosophy around a conclusion, which is about as un-scientific and anti-intellectual as one can get… unless you are under 18 and it’s your first try.

Our Founding documents only mention “the Creator” once, and that was in the Declaration of Independence, where Jefferson affirmed Man’s natural right to “pursue life, liberty and happiness” without permission or managerial oversight by the state.

I wonder if MA’s have a replacement in mind about man’s natural right to liberty, without the mention of the Creator? Certainly, when in 5th Grade, or even a sophomore in college, they wouldn’t have known to ask this question. But now they have to ask it, if only to themselves, or they will have to admit that their new-found philosophy is a “religious” fraud and that the real end game to their cause is politics, in which they have chosen the anti-freedom side. In doing so they have to admit that their true enemy here isn’t religion, but freedom itself.

Fact: America was at one time the only country atheists could live openly without being ostracized, under the protection of the majority of disapproving Christians who also always believed to mind their own business, a tradition as American as its many religions. This protection was even extended to homosexuals, where in other places, even England, they were imprisoned, and in some other places killed, some in the most horrible of ways. That beat goes on, and the irony of the massacres of the gay night club in Orlando was that those gay men were murdered by a man who was forsworn to kill them for his religion while many gays in that bar voiced antagonism against a Christianity that has always disapproved, but never once tried to kill them.

The path chosen by Modern Atheists, as a front for Statism, is one of self-destruction. America was created specifically to prevent this kind of collapse of human society, by passing the American gene of individualism from generation to generation through reciprocity, which in democracy-speak is much the same as the Christian Golden Rule, “Reciprocate with thy neighbor as you would have your neighbor reciprocate with you.” It insures survivability.

I like to go to places on the internet where Modern Atheists hang out together. Huffington Post seems to be a popular site, for HuffPo offer almost a weekly religious lesson with catchy titles aimed at Christians. And of course one wonders why would a Leftist site always seem so concerned about my soul? Its commenters are of the ordinary variety in that they enjoy sharing the mutual friendship of others on the Left who also enjoy bellyaching about how Christians have made their lives miserable. For unhappy they genuinely are. (By their words, ye shall know them.)

MA followers display a high degree of arrested development, their highest level of maturity achieved before they are 21. (You still even see smatterings of this in Obama.) But at least they spell better. But as whiners they are a cut above the scat-mouthed foot stompers found on many of the more LGBT-oriented sites, although there is a lot of cross-over, inasmuch as this generation of gays have a very dark anger at Christianity, since it’s about a God who has been abundantly clear about what He thinks of men who lie with other men, or bite pillows, and stuff like that. They cannot foot-stomp this God out of existence, nor can they avoid a final judgment which He promises. Or so He says.

This is the point of intersection between LGBT and Modern Atheism.


My argument that Modern Atheism isn’t really about atheism isn’t difficult to make. Just see one of their pieces of art (above), a theme you get ad naseum in their on-line screeds. Modern Atheists have had to redefine atheism just in order to call themselves that, which was never a high hill for Marxists to climb. They did wonders with “love” in the 1970s, “truth” since the ’30s and “scientific fact” since the ’90s. Redefining iconic cultural terms is one of their best skills.

But it’s clear from this picture the purpose of Modern Atheism is not to announce the non-existence of God, but to declare its undying hatred of Him…and to dispense with all His symbols. Considering Marxists prior “successes” with reeducation camps, the Gulag, it’s not hard to see the outcome the movement’s handlers would like to see.

“No, I’m an academic”

In the 2009 film, “Angels and Demons”, a Roman church prelate ask the Tom Hanks character if he believes in God. And Hanks answers, “No, I’m an academic” only in the “as-if” tone of the smart ass leftist academicians, begging the audience conclusion that “everyone knows” religion and academicians are mutually exclusive.

This is a Bingo! moment for Modern Atheists, for it allows them to get a sense, the taste and feel, of what being a true academician is like… a man of letters and science who will nonetheless lay aside all prejudices about religion, and do the right and just thing based on an entirely secular code rooted in observable Science. Amen.

I’ve known hundreds of academician-scientists in my life, in the classroom and out, and not one has ever volunteered information that he or she was an atheist. Nor had one ever remarked unfavorably about Christianity, or advised me to drop my silly superstitions. One of my favorite academician characters in film was Monty Woolley’s character, Prof Wutheridge in the 1947 classic. “The Bishop’s Wife” – portraying an old friend of a New York Episcopalian bishop from the days when he was just a young parish vicar in the poorer sections of the city. In much of America a priest or minister was the only well read conversation an academic could get, and those relationships were hardly hostile, or confrontational.

The image of that relationship today, as offered up by Modern Atheists, and their shill apologists at Huffington Post, et al, is of strident enmity, which, if it exists today, is of relative recent origin, and largely one-sided, since Christians, at the parish level even more than the corporate, rarely behave that way, at least not since the Scopes Trial, where religion got that anti-intellectual tag for denying about man’s ascent from apes… which is still not yet proven.

Actually, adult Christians debate through pastoral letters (since the Second Century), and the medium of apologetics, (I follow several on Twitter), who, unlike me, only ask for prayers for anti-Christianists who attack them.

Only the young, guided by temperament and these days, a misguided sense of importance and now, faux-academic attainment, attack, which is why I determined that the Modern Atheist movement is largely made up of the very young and immature. The MA movement provides them much needed moral support (pardon the pun).

I only do what I do, attack, because the anti-intellectual shoe is now on the other foot. Modern Atheism’s cause is neither an academic nor religious cause. It is purely political, with a clear political end in mind. And this is proven by the fact that the academics are infantile phony-baloney at best, and the political aim clear enough for anyone with an ounce of critical thinking to see.

About all that secular humanism crap

I have yet to see a single ModAtheist preach a single virtue; love, charity, reciprocity, even equality. But I have witnessed, ad nauseum, their display of all the vices… envy, (yes envy) arrogance, vanity, down-the-nose elitism, and a capacity to hate so large that it has to occupy the center core of their being. Whatever Modern Atheists are selling, they are not preaching to the lost, urging us to come over and be like them. They are damning us for damnation’s sake.

In that sense, Christianity defines MA’s, in the same way the most wretched serf defined the French aristocracy for a thousand years.

The French defined themselves by who they were not. But unlike mere elitists or snobs, who looked down on others, or even Pharisees, who thanked God they were not like the guy standing next to them in Temple.


… the French nobility did not want to raise up their gutter trash lowlifes. They did not want to better their condition, nor teach them to be more like their betters. They wanted them to stay in their sad estate, for only by being wretched class could they glory in their own magnificence.

This is why I introduced Blaise Pascal at the beginning, because he was French, fitting none of the criteria of French nobility, though of their class, but also none of the Modern Atheists’ ideal of an easy-to-dupe useful idiot. Also he died at the age of 39, long before he could grow to become a garrulous old fool like me. Pascal was a recognized mathematician and inventor (of a calculating machine), which means among other things that he could work with his hands at things other than picking his nose, or scrolling through Facebook. He did not have his “religious experience” and take up philosophy until he was 30, when by modern MA standards, he should have known better, since, as everyone knows, only the simple-minded choose God or have it rammed down their throats at an early age.

And what Pascal did with his new found “freedom” was what no modern youth even knows to do, it seems. He fell headlong into study and inquiry, “critical thinking” it’s called, which brought forward not a compliant echo of Church doctrine, but rather a questioning nitpicker. In doing so, he revealed that Christianity is not the monolithic body of thought or culture MA’s portray it to be. Never was, never will be.

Pascal’s line of inquiry was called Jansenism, which was strongly opposed by the Jesuits, who were sort of the soldier-priests of the Catholic Church, formed in the early days of the Reformation, having snuffed out protestant movements in Poland, the Baltics and parts of Germany. This period of activity should be interesting for new atheists in that over a million protestant Huguenots in France were killed, another half million escaping, many to various parts of America, my area of central Virginia among them, which seemed to be hospitable to virtually every religious way of thinking.

This highlights the difference between “corporate” religion and “front line” religion, a thing I’m sure atheists aren’t aware of and would have a difficult time weaving into the tapestry Modern Atheists call “Christianity” and would render MA studies seem unable to distinguish, placing them at the 5th grade level at best.

Blaise Pascal was everything Modern Atheists think they are, yet are nothing that Blaise Pascal ever was.

An observant ModernAtheist might ask, “A scientist and a Christian, and a bright young man. How can that be?”

He had an inquiring mind, digging deep in study and observation (a thing unknown to most ModernAtheists, I think)  to find out the elements of a thing, whether a combination of numbers, a mechanism, or a line of thought.

Pascal accepted no one’s teaching, either in the classroom, or in a text book, at it’s face.

Pascal’s program is still the preferred methodology of all Science and Philosophy, which is why it is easy for me to confirm that most Modern Atheists aren’t atheists at all, for they know nothing of the Method. The failure of modern atheism is found in it “knowing attitude” because true Science is always carried by an inquiring attitude. True atheists, forever in search of something, some truth or fact, will say no more about God than “I can find no evidence…” which implies an intellectual search continues. To say “there is no God” is scientific blasphemy. for it confirms what Science can never know. Hubris, also common to the Left. This is why Albert Einstein and Mortimer Adler determined only very late in life  that there had to be some sort of Grand Design in the order of the universe, ergo, a Designer. Adler, considered the 20th Century’s finest philosopher, “proved” God by offering a negative argument, something to the effect that “if there is a God, then all things are possible, but if there is no God, then all things are permissible”.

May I suggest to every ModernAtheist a copy of Pascal’s “Pensees” which are little more than shorts notes he wrote to himself while thinking on deeper subjects. I read this book in study hall in high school while JFK was president, from the Harvard Classics sitting on the shelf.

It is a perfect training vehicle… I dare you to try it…for each note can launch a series of inquiries… not about God, mind you, but about the process of critical thinking, which has been denied you from the very beginning. How can a Christian use logic and reason to question his Church while I am not allowed to use the same in challenging my own atheistic creed?

So, when MA’s speak of the Christian tyranny of America, they prove their own ignorance as to where that knowledge came from. Young MA’s are taught as early as 4th grade to accept without question the received wisdom of the State, yet accuse young Christians of the same sin, only Pascal proves they are more likely to study their faith more critically.


http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2016/08/10/a-letter-for-the-lost-modern-atheists/feed/ 1 64169