Are We Really That Stupid?

“International primacy” can be defined as a government’s ability to exercise more influence on the behavior of other governments with respect to more issues than any other government can exercise. It is a function, then, of weight, of power.

Empires will rise and fall, as they have since the beginning of recorded time. There have been many. The Roman Empire, the Manchu Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Spanish and British Empires all had their time upon history’s stage. They all had primacy in their day and in what was then the world, as they knew it.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union in about 1989 to 1990, the United States has stood alone as history’s only truly global power with primacy over the entire world. The question for us today, then, is does the United States government want to remain a credible global power with world primacy? If so, what is it going to do to make that happen?

There are, basically, two views of history. The first we can call “the Mistake,” or the “Accidental View” or the “Negligence View.” I like to call it “the Dumb” or “Stupid View.” A person who holds that view believes that things happen internationally in politics because of the blunders and stupid mistakes of the world’s politicians.

The other view can be called “the Conspiracy View,” which holds that decisions are intentionally made to bring about specific, usually sinister, results by those who run the world.

Within the Conspiracy View, there are at least two types of views. The first is that the players are all visible and that their actions are simply an unlawful effort to increase their own personal power and their nation’s control over the world.

The second view is that things are rarely, if ever, as they seem; and that the players who are visible are simply pawns for an unseen hand that guides and directs them. In fact, an unseen hand guides all of history. This unseen hand is usually seen as leading the world toward some type of spiritual, occultist end.

Different people who look at the Middle East today and at United States’ Foreign Policy, in general, hold both of these views.

For example, the Dumb View is often cited as a reason for the failures of the Obama Administration in the Foreign Policy area. A recent article written by Ralph Peters in To The Point News, compares Mr. Obama with Hamlet. “He dithers and scratches his head,” Mr. Peters said. “He talks to his Ivy Leaguers and, when he finally makes a decision, it is too little and too late.”

The South China Sea area of the Pacific Rim would be a good example of this. The International Law of the Sea gives nations 12 miles of sea from their territory and a 200-mile economic zone from their territory. The question is then, “What constitutes their territory?”

Far from the Chinese mainland, China constructed seven artificial reefs atop islands that would otherwise be submerged rocks, at least most of the time. China then called these reefs “Chinese territory,” and declared an exclusion zone around them.

The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Japan and Taiwan all had claims on the area, at least as strong as those of China. These countries all have treaties with the United States, so they looked to the United States for guidance and for leadership.

Keep in mind that the disputed area is one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. It took many years for China to complete the project. Then they started militarily provisioning the reefs with artillery, missiles, etc. They built runways.

President Obama did nothing during this entire time. He was apparently trying to decide. He was “blithering and dithering,” and trying to decide whether to let freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most important shipping lanes be denied to the United States and to the whole world. He was trying to decide whether to do that or not.

Finally, at long last, he chose the mildest of actions and sent one ship through the area. He admitted that it was only to preserve his agenda for the Trans Pacific Partnership. Now, the Chinese are adding runways on the other side of the world, as I said, and only military action could dislodge them.

He says, “No boots on the ground in Syria;” but then he announced through his Secretary of Defense that boots were, in fact, on the ground, and that more were coming in the form of 50 Special Forces troops. It is obvious that it takes a lot more than 50 troops, even if they are Special Forces, to run an operation like that in Syria. Just the air support alone, which has been running for quite some time, would probably take hundreds of people.

The question then is, “Why now?” After refusing to do anything to oust Mr. Assad from Syria until the Russians came in to keep him in place, why would President Obama now send troops in?

Apparently, the Russians believe in the Conspiracy View of history. Said another way, they believe that the Americans can’t possibly be that stupid, so that it has to be a conspiracy.

Colonel Alexander Zihlin of the Russian Army, and a military expert with regard to Russian Military Policy, said recently that, “Russia has to do what it is doing.”

“In the event Syria fell, it would free up ISIS fighters for renewed campaigns in Chechnya, Dagestan and east of the Caspian as well, pushing north from Afghanistan into former Soviet Central Asia. Recall that ISIS is a rebranding and broadening of the same Saudi et al backed network of foreign legionary soldiers, which previously was called al-Qaeda and the Maktab al-Khidamat Network which preceded it.”

China, through its military spokesman, has recently stated that the Islamic State is lead by Sunni officers who are armed and funded by General David Patraeus, U.S. Commander during the Iraq Siege and former Director of the CIA. “The Islamic State,” he says, “learned its sophisticated tactics, its leadership and its use of modern weapons from America.”

The point is that the Russians and the Chinese believe that the United States started, trained and funded the Islamic State in order to destabilize the Levant Region of the Middle East, and to destabilize Russia, as well. Once these terrorist armies conquered Syria, they could continue into the southern part of Russian territory to Muslimize all of the infidels in the area.

Russia would then be preoccupied by fighting these Muslims. At least, that is what the Russians say they believe. They believe this, apparently, because they are unable to believe that the train-wreck that is American Foreign Policy can possibly be negligence. “Nobody is that stupid,” the Russians seem to be saying.

Is any of this true? I don’t know, but I do know that power abhors a vacuum. When power is absent, the vacuum will be filled by something, by somebody. Taking the offensive is usually better than playing defense, especially against people like this.

Finally, folks, is Barack Obama that evil or is he just an incompetent bumbler? Well, I report, you decide, but that’s the way I see it.

Honor Murder

Darrell Castle talks about the Muslim custom of killing relatives usually one’s children in the name of honor.

The REAL Differences Between the Two Parties


In a Washington Times op-ed piece, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich predicts the possible end of the Democratic Party as we know it.

Well, none of us in the Constitution Party would shed tears over that, but here’s the problem:  if the Republican Party should win the White House and both houses in Congress, and if it enjoys that monopoly over the federal government for more than eight years, then the dictatorship of the Right will, in the end, be no better for those who love Liberty than under the Left.

Why do people not get it, that the Left Wing and the Right Wing both belong to the same Socialist bird?  BOTH parties are socialist.

George Wallace used to say, “There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two major parties,” but George was wrong.  There is a huge difference between Socialist Party A and Socialist Party B.

Party A is international in flavor.  It appeals to “the workers of the world” – and is supported by the Labor Movement.  It implements welfare to the poor and every underprivileged group, promoting both class and race warfare.  It worships the agenda set forth by Karl Marx, by Lenin, and by Gramsci.  Party A wants to reduce our national sovereignty, and place our army, indeed our nation, under the control of a One World Government.  This is called International Socialism.

Party B is national in flavor.  It distrusts the United Nations, and wants to strengthen our national sovereignty.  It appeals to the business class, to the capitalist, and worships the doctrines of Adam Smith and mercantilism.  This is a militant party, favoring empire building (“building bridges” and “nation building”) for profits here.  It favors a first-strike policy toward any who cross us.  It implements welfare to businessmen and farmers and corporations.  Party B favors National Socialism.

Once you understand all that, and realize the differences are real, you come to grasp the fact that a choice between Socialist Part A and Socialist Party B is really a choice like Poland had in 1939 – they could go with the Communists, or they could go with the Nazis, but either way, Poland was going to go – under – to one group of socialists or the other.

The two parties hate one another with a mutual passion, but the argument is not over socialism – it’s over (a) how to bring it to power, and (b) who will rule.  Both are inimical to a free society.

Those who see loyalty to a party as more important than loyalty to the Constitution are, in the final analysis, traitors to Constitutional Liberty.  They will subvert all principles in order to stay in power.

Carroll Quigley in his book “Tragedy and Hope” wrote, “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers, instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”


Sen. Cruz: The Budget Deal Is a Corrupt Betrayal of the American People

[wp_lightbox_prettyPhoto_video link=”” width=”853″ height=”480″ description=”Sen. Cruz: The Budget Deal Is a Corrupt Betrayal of the American People” source=”” title=”Sen. Cruz: The Budget Deal Is a Corrupt Betrayal of the American People”]

Liberal/Neocon Domination Killing America

Can America survive another eight years of liberal/neocon domination of Washington, D.C.?

The past seven presidential administrations (Bush, Sr. – Obama) and congresses (Republican and Democratic) have taken the United States to the brink of oppression–and maybe destruction. That’s 28 years (counting 2016) of continuous domination by liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans. And make no mistake about it: there is virtually NO DIFFERENCE between liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans. They work in tandem. Best buds. Same agenda. Twins. Same parties. Same golf outings. Same clubs. Same money-grubbing. Controlled by the same people. Ad infinitum.

Under these liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans, the United States has become the most spied on country in the history of mankind. The brute-force of Washington, D.C., has all but expunged the Natural Law principles that founded this nation. Pulpit and pew; people and priest; magistrate and citizen; professor and student; newscaster and viewer: for the most part, they have all fallen in lockstep with the establishment Democrat and Republican parties. Hardly anyone understands the principles upon which our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were founded–including, and especially, the miscreants in Washington, D.C.

Beyond that, liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans have taken America into a perpetual state of war. Take down those yellow flags, folks, because our troops aren’t EVER coming home.

Not only have the liberal/neocon miscreants in D.C., made enemies out of virtually every country on the planet, they seem determined to make enemies out of the American citizenry. Just listen to the things our FBI and Justice Department spokesmen are saying about US–We the People. They seem to consider US more of an enemy than our enemies. Just like in banana republics, our prisons are filled with people who should be regarded as political prisoners. At the same time, sure-enough real criminals such as G.W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton enjoy the lifestyle of kings and queens.

Add tens of millions of illegal aliens who have absolutely no understanding of constitutional government, who respect nothing but raw power, and who see government as nothing more than something to give them stuff, and the problem is exacerbated exponentially. Yet, both liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans are facilitating this invasion of illegal aliens that is taking place–and will continue to take place if Paul Ryan and most of the Republican and Democrat leadership have their way (which they probably will).

In addition, the vast majority of our elected representatives and senators in D.C., appear drunk with power and personal ambition. It truly seems that hardly any of them give a hoot in hell what the Constitution says. They are in it for themselves–the country be damned!

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives had an opportunity to do something truly significant to reverse the power of the neocons over politics in D.C., by electing a genuine anti-establishment conservative. Sadly, they chose instead to elect another royal neocon, Paul Ryan, as Speaker. Republican House members could not have made a WORSE choice.

Paul Ryan has a Cumulative Freedom Index Score of 58% by the New American Magazine–which offers one of the more accurate assessments of a congressman or senator’s voting record.

Ryan voted for TPA, the horrific jobs-killing NAFTA-type trade bill–also called Obamatrade. He voted for Country of Origin Labeling Amendments Act, which repealed the requirements for Country of Origin labeling (which keeps Americans in the dark about where their food is coming from) and ceded authority over food-related regulations to the World Trade Authority (WTO).

Ryan voted for the National Cybersecurity Protection Advancement Act (NCPA). Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan) rightly warned, “These bills violate the Fourth Amendment, override privacy laws, and give the government unwarranted access to the personal information of potentially millions of Americans.”

Paul Ryan voted against a bill that would have prevented U.S. taxpayer dollars from being given to “Syrian rebels.” Those Syrian rebels, of course, are ISIS terrorists. Ryan is simply another warmongering neocon like Dick Cheney, John Boehner, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain.

Ryan voted against a bill that would have prevented the further militarization of our local and State police agencies by prohibiting the U.S. military from supplying local police departments with combat military equipment, such as drones, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, and bombs. These military utensils are more fitted for the military occupation of a hostile territory–which apparently is the way Paul Ryan and his fellow liberal/neocons in Washington, D.C., must view the American homeland.

Paul Ryan voted against an amendment that would have prevented the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens. “Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the indefinite military detention of any person detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force authority in the United States, its territories, or possessions by providing immediate transfer to a trial and proceedings by a court. It also would strike language that would provide for mandatory military custody of covered parties.

“The House [with John Boehner and Paul Ryan’s leadership] rejected Smith’s amendment. Indefinite military detention is a blatant violation of the Sixth Amendment, and an executive who can wield such powers is akin to a monarch or dictator. As Rep. Smith said during consideration of the amendment: ‘That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take someone and lock them up without due process. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this country.’”

See Ryan’s record here:

Freedom Index: Congressional Scorecard For Paul Ryan

The Conservative Review also gives Paul Ryan an “F” grade on their scorecard. They note that Ryan voted to fund Planned Parenthood. Ryan also voted against killing Obama’s amnesty deal for illegal aliens.

See the scorecard here:

Conservative Review: Scorecard Paul Ryan

Amnesty for illegals is one of Ryan’s priorities. He “promised” conservatives in the House that he would delay amnesty until 2017 (BIG DEAL), but everyone knows Ryan will most definitely ram an amnesty deal through the House. On this issue, Ryan is WORSE than Boehner.

“On Monday the Remembrance Project, a group which honors the memory of Americans killed by illegal aliens, hosted a press conference. Breitbart News spoke exclusively to many of the victim’s family members about their thoughts on House Republican leadership.

“‘We don’t want Paul Ryan whatsoever. He’s worse than Boehner. We’ve seen what he will do [if he’s elected Speaker]’ said the Remembrance Project’s founder, Maria Espinoza.

“A newly-aired PBS documentary shows how that Paul Ryan and Mick Mulvaney labored with Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) to push Rubio’s amnesty agenda through the House of Representatives. Rush Limbaugh has warned that if Ryan is Speaker and Rubio is President, ‘Then in the first 12 months of the Rubio�administration, first 12-to-18 months, the donor-class agenda is implemented, including amnesty and whatever else they want. That is the objective here.’

“‘All of us are against Ryan [as Speaker] and Marco Rubio [for President] because we’re against amnesty,’ Mary Ann Mendoza told Breitbart News exclusively.”

See the report here:

Families Of Victims Murdered By Illegal Aliens To House Republicans: ‘No Paul Ryan’

Just recently, the neocon Mitt Romney admitted what most of us knew all along (but what he vehemently denied on the presidential campaign trail in 2012): that he supports Obamacare and proudly helped pave the way for it. And, of course, who did Neocon Romney choose as his running mate? Neocon Matt Ryan.

See the report here:

Mitt Romney Praises Obamacare, Admits He Helped Pave The Way

Just this week, the new incoming House Speaker Paul Ryan is supporting John Boehner and Barack Obama as they collaborate together to remove another debt ceiling limitation for the current federal spending bill. As a report said the deal “effectively writes lame-duck President Obama a blank check to rack up debt.”

And, as I have told you before, the Gun Owners of America (GOA) has warned that a Ryan speakership would be “Boehner on Steroids.” GOA also said that a Ryan speakership “would be disastrous for gun owners.”

See GOA’s statement here:

Paul Ryan Would Be “Boehner On Steroids”

Replacing John Boehner with Paul Ryan is like trading a fox for a coyote. Neither one had or has any intention of guarding America’s constitutional hen house.

I tell you the truth: the ONLY thing that stands between us and open oppression is tens of millions of gun owners in this country. Our national media (and much of our local media–especially in big cities) is no help. In fact, they are enthusiastic supporters of our demise. Our institutions of higher learning are no help. And our pastors and churches have almost totally capitulated. For the most part, they provide no help for the cause of liberty. NONE.

How long is it going to take for our State governors and legislatures to realize that, like it or not, sooner or later the only way to preserve liberty will be to follow the example of our patriot forebears and separate from an out-of-control, power-mad American Crown–which is exactly the way D.C., is behaving. If an abused wife has the legal and moral right to separate from an abusive husband, abused states certainly have a legal and moral right to separate from an abusive federal government.

Of the current crop of presidential candidates, the only one that I think has a true grasp of the Constitution (even if he doesn’t always act like it) is Rand Paul. But his campaign is already on life-support.

For example, I live in what might be the strongest Ron Paul county in America. One still sees Ron Paul bumper stickers all over the place. So far, I have not seen one single Rand Paul bumper sticker. Not one! That is as big a testament to Rand’s inability to excite the Ron Paul revolutionaries and constitutionalist/libertarians as one could ever find.

Donald Trump is successfully taking on the establishment unlike anyone is modern politics. I see that as a huge net positive. Frankly, I like a lot of things he is saying. But other things he says concern me greatly. And maybe what I’m concerned about the most is what he is NOT saying–I haven’t heard him say anything about the Constitution.

As for the rest of the candidates, I don’t trust any of them–including Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.

Ben Carson’s emphatic promotion of government-forced vaccinations is anathema to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge and appreciation for the Constitution and Bill of Rights. His support for forced-vaccinations portrays a vast constitutional ignorance. Plus, I see Carson as extremely weak on the Second Amendment. His initial belief was that people who live in big cities should not be allowed to own semi-automatic firearms. After entering the presidential race, and taking fire for his statements from GOP constituents, he seems to have changed his position. But I don’t trust that this is as much him “seeing the light” as it is him “feeling the heat.” As brilliant a mind as he has for medicine, I see Carson as constitutionally challenged.

And as good as Ted Cruz is on social issues and immigration, he is just another rabid neocon when it comes to foreign policy. The neocon wars of aggression in the Middle East would undoubtedly continue unabated (and probably even escalate) under a Cruz presidency. No thanks.

Jeb Bush is the neocon’s neocon. He is the quintessential establishment insider–and his list of contributors reflects this fact. In spite of the support Bush is receiving from establishment insiders, his campaign is floundering. If Jeb withdraws, establishment support will most likely fall to Marco Rubio’s campaign. Rubio is an establishment player through and through. In fact, as noted above, Rubio would be as bad as Barack Obama when it comes to amnesty for illegals. It does appear that the globalists are posturing a Rubio/Ryan team to take America into the New World Order.

Regardless, I am convinced of one thing: when the meltdown, or breakup–or whatever else you want to call it–happens, I am EXACTLY where I want to be. Like Switzerland in the middle of WW II, this region of the country will NEVER surrender its guns or its liberties. If the East Coast and West Coast want to dive headlong into oppression, let them. The Redoubt isn’t budging. Our resolve is as fixed as our mountains.

I hope Texas can hold out too.

I ask again: Can America survive another eight years of liberal/neocon domination of Washington, D.C., because that’s probably what we are looking at.

Maybe the better question is, Can your State and region survive?

P.S. As I said last week, I am pleased to announce that James Jaeger’s brand new film, “Midnight Ride: When Rogue Politicians Call For Martial Law,” will be premiered on Friday, November 6, 2015, from 6pm through 11pm Mountain Time. Distinguished luminaries such as Pat Buchanan, Larry Pratt, Ron Paul, G. Edward Griffin, Sheriff Richard Mack, Stewart Rhodes, Edwin Vieira, Jr., and several others are featured in this film. I am honored to also be featured.

I invite readers to go to my website on Friday evening, November 6, and watch the premiere of this outstanding film. And please tell your friends. DVDs of the film will also be available the night of the premiere via my website. Watch the film here:

Midnight Ride: When Rogue Politicians Call For Martial Law