BLUF:
[American Thinker] Speaking of grifters, our society, our culture that benefits everyone is not just threatened from outside our borders, it is, at the very least, not protected by our "betters." These people not only do not have our welfare at heart, they despise us, and they despise us so much they don’t mind telling us — consider Hilary Clinton’s "deplorables" description or Harry Reid’s comments about being able to smell tourists to D.C. As for those who believe that Bill Clinton really "feels your pain," I see no evidence of that other than big talk. In fact, most politicians are complicit with those that benefit the most and are affected the least by the current open-border policies that are undermining our way of life.
It has already started, but where the tipping point is in this process, I do not know. There is a tipping point, however, and there will be an economic and societal collapse that no regular folks will survive intact if unchecked, unvetted immigration overwhelms and eradicates the culture that has led to the freedom and prosperity that we thoughtlessly take for granted today.
Continued on Page 47
#2
Diversity might actually be a good thing but should never be promoted at the expense of one ethnic group over another. Open borders and Affirmative Action are real problems because they do just that. Certain minorities get jobs and promotions they don't deserve at the expense of those who are deserving because of Affirmative Action. Open borders dilute the votes of legal citizens when illegal aliens vote.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/23/2021 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Diversity presumes the existence of its opposite.
Without a common culture based on shared values and agreed-upon definitions -- of worth, of fairness, of honor and beauty, truth and goodness -- without this foundation of a unified culture, diversity just means incoherence and disarray.
Case in point: we could easily assimilate millions of early 20c immigrants because the Italians, Irish, Greeks, Armenians, Poles, even the Mexicans of that era who came to the US quickly adopted the national culture that had come into being at the end of the 19th century.
By 1941, these groups had become more American than the Americans, proudly serving in the military and brandishing their patriotic pride -- especially during their legacy ethnic holiday celebrations (St Pat's, Columbus Day etc).
Today all the cultural force is centrifugal. There is no "unum," only pluribus. Diversity in this era is disastrous -- the opposite of what we need.
#2
... and the church implemented the restrictions the government imposed which won the church praise from the government even though the church was in constant negotiations with authorities.
#4
Interestingly enough, when the restrictions came into being last year, my church started live casts of services on Facebook. Turns out it expanded our reach from a small community in the South to respondents all over! Also, found out that while the number of people who attended in person dropped; the on-line number more than made up for it! If it hadn't been for the restrictions, we would have never made those changes.
#5
It's nice to live in South Carolina, where our governor has refused to issue any regulations regarding churches because he doesn't believe he has the authority to do so under the First Amendment. Love him!
Posted by: Tom ||
12/23/2021 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#6
#3 The previous illustrates very poor decision making by all persons involved @ that church.
Much better decisions than yours in life obviously.
[Spectator] Like many people my age (62), I was taught both at home and in school that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a great president. FDR, I was taught, saved American democracy in the 1930s with the New Deal and led the nation to victory against Hitlerism in the 1940s. That view of FDR was reinforced by many television documentaries and history books. And virtually every poll of historians — including the most recent C-Span poll — places FDR in the top five of all U.S. presidents (usually in third place behind Lincoln and Washington). This is so despite persuasive revisionist historical works that paint a very different picture of FDR’s presidency.
Let’s start with the New Deal. In her book The Forgotten Man, Amity Shlaes shows that the New Deal — so lionized by liberal historians and Democrats — did not restore the U.S. economy as promised by FDR and his “brain trust,” but instead extended the sufferings of the Great Depression for seven more years. Unemployment remained well beyond 10 percent throughout the 1930s, only subsiding with the coming of World War II. “The cause of the duration of the Depression,” she writes, “was Washington’s persistent intervention” in the economy. The end result of the New Deal’s “bold persistent experimentation” was “inflexible statism” that has evolved into a gargantuan federal government exercising nearly unlimited powers to a degree that would have shocked the Founders of our country.
But an even greater failure of FDR’s administration in the 1930s was the nation’s lack of preparedness for the Second World War. This is detailed most recently in Arthur Herman’s biography of General Douglas MacArthur (Douglas MacArthur: American Warrior). MacArthur was kept on as the Army’s chief of staff by FDR, and the two repeatedly clashed over the size of the military budget. MacArthur sensed as early as 1934 that another war was on the horizon, but FDR’s budget director proposed to cut the Army’s budget by half and to reduce War Department expenditures by $80 million. MacArthur called the proposed budget “a stunning blow to national defense,” and later told the graduating class at West Point that the “necessity of national defense” was being “sacrificed in the name of economy.”
At one White House meeting between the secretary of war, MacArthur, and FDR, the president repeatedly resisted with harsh and bitter words the war secretary’s pleadings to provide more money for the armed forces. MacArthur interjected by telling FDR: “When we lose the next war and an American boy, lying in the mud with an enemy bayonet through his belly and an enemy foot on his dying throat, spits out his last curse, I want the name to be Roosevelt, not MacArthur.”
By 1939, the U.S. Army ranked 19th in the world with 174,000 personnel, less than Portugal’s army. The Army Air Corps had 26,000 airmen and about 1,200 planes, many of them obsolete. The U.S. Navy was in a little better shape, with 15 battleships, five carriers, 18 heavy cruisers, and 19 light cruisers, but was still unprepared for global war. As late as the summer of 1941, some American troops were training for combat with wooden broomsticks instead of rifles.
FDR’s defenders usually note that while FDR sensed the gathering storm of war abroad, the American people and Congress were wholeheartedly opposed to war preparation, and FDR would not move forward in this area without public and political support. That may be so, but really great leaders — like Lincoln and Washington and Britain’s Winston Churchill — took political risks when their nation’s security was at stake. FDR was unwilling to take such risks. He was above all a political animal — and a deceptive, devious one. General MacArthur once described FDR as “a man who would never tell the truth when a lie would serve him just as well.” Even as FDR covertly began involving the United States as a belligerent in the wars in Asia and Europe, he promised the American people in the 1940 campaign that their sons would not be sent overseas to fight in foreign wars. Even as he tightened sanctions against Japan in the late 1930s, he left our forces unprepared in the Philippines and elsewhere when Japan attacked.
#2
The nation was in the Great Depression. People were suffering. FDR put the economy as priority over the military. The factories, industries, infrastructure that resulted provided the military hardware needed in WWII. If the military had been prioritized instead of the he ravaged economy, the military would not have the industrial might that won a two front WWII.
#3
My comment at #1 of exasperation wasn't for Badanov but for the author Francis Senpa. My father and his brothers sisters and parents suffered the Great Depression. They credit FDR for restoring the economy and my father and his brothers fought and were all wounded on both WWII fronts.
They are all gone now and I HATE what these revisionists are doing to their legacy.
#4
The economic policies pursued by Roosevelt were advertised as "pulling the country out of the depression" but it is not at all clear that they did not have the opposite effect, though I am sure that the intent was to help the economy.
The problemis that government interventions to help usually do have the opposite effect.
What used to happen in the 19th century, when there was a recession, was that industries , which had debt, which was most of them, went bankrupt That means the owners lost all their investment,. But the lucky onews who bought the businebankrupt business es had all the assets, without the debts, so that could quickly restart the businesses with a much better chance at success than the predecessors ha.
The old owners still had their brains and experience, and also could quickly recover using them.
FDR's interventions prevented this natural process and so led to eight years of suffering rather than one. His predecessor was no better and started in the wrong direction.
Roosevelt followed along the same stupid track.
FDR built industries, factories, schools which gave the workers hard cold cash. That cash was spent on the economy. It is called stimulus that time and again presidents still do when the economy starts sinking.
I went to school in buildings built by FDR's New Deal. Quality buildings that would not have been there without FDR.
#7
I see the left, aided by "revisionist history" is now comparing the Biden presidency to that of FDR. An attack on Guam, Pearl Harbor, or Taiwan should further validate the comparison.
Had he not died in office, FDR would still be president today. The left hates term limits. I give you Biden-Obama as an example.
#9
I suggest Mr. Barnsmell read some books by Sean McMeekin. his history of the relationship between FDR and Stalin is most instructional. His meticulous researched facts reveals a pattern of behavior favoring, and submitting to Stalin's unreasonable demands.
Read "'Stalin's War". Jaw-dropping revelations based on new research.
#11
...and FDR could give concessions because he started something that would give the U.S. superiority over Stalin and the rest of the world in short order called the Manhattan Project...
#12
FDR's Manhatten Project saved an estimated 1 million lives because the Atomic Bombs eliminated the need for a conventional invasion of mainland Japan.
#13
FDR kicked off the big Government Ponzi scheme called Social Security. It was obviously unconstitutional but later sold to Supreme Court as a tax with no earmark to any specific program.
FDR did throw Japanese Americans into internment camps; luckily, that big GIVERnment program did not catch on as did Social Security.
He did rid the world of The Axis powers so it was not all bad for FDR.
#15
But an even greater failure of FDR’s administration in the 1930s was the nation’s lack of preparedness for the Second World War.
No that was the American people in general. They wanted no part of foreign wars. It's a long tradition. Many believed we got burned by the results of WW1. The Senate refused to ratify the Versailles Treaty (instead they retracted the declaration of war).
PS I would never use Mac as a 'expert' given his record of handling of the Philippines defense at the same time.
Follow the link to view the photos
[REGNUM] Winter has come to Sevastopol - not only a calendar winter, but also a real one, with snowfalls and frosts. A rare show for this city was shot by a photojournalist of IA REGNUM .
It was snowing in the city -- intermittently -- from the evening of December 20. According to local residents, they have not seen so much snow here since 2016.
While some admire the beauty of snow-covered Sevastopol, others are struggling with the consequences of the elements.
Most of the work is done by public utilities and road services. They have been working for the second day to eliminate the consequences of bad weather.
In the last 24 hours alone, 275 tons of deicing mixtures were used on the city's roads, and another 116.6 tons of spreading material were used in yards, squares, and sidewalks. A total of 840 people are involved in cleaning yards and sidewalks from snow.
[Breitbart] Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is blasting America’s political and corporate elites as "the number one reason" China has become "as powerful as they are" as he moves to detangle the state’s finances from China-owned companies.
During a State Board of Administration meetingthis week, DeSantis went after the nation’s ruling class for their propping up of China via allowing the communist country to enter the World Trade Organization (WTO) and supporting decades-long free trade policy that has gutted domestic manufacturing.
From 2001 to 2018, U.S. free trade with China eliminated 3.7 million American jobs from the economy — 2.8 million of which were lost in American manufacturing. During that same period, at least 50,000 American manufacturing plants closed down.
"If you go back a generation, the idea was if we make China into the WTO ... that sent a lot of American production capacity over to China," DeSantis said:
Continued on Page 47
[ABC] Harvard professor found guilty of hiding ties to China
A Harvard University professor charged with hiding his ties to a Chinese-run recruitment program has been found guilty on all counts in a federal court in Boston
Other investigators have outed Soros and Pierre Omidyar as two of eight donors who've each given $50m or more.
A billion dollars from a dozen or so oligarchs.
To rig elections.
Funneled through their opaque, 501(c)3 dark money shell organizations -- this from the shitheads who blabber about "electoral integrity" and who call us "insurrections" for noticing election fraud.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Breitbart] Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is blasting America’s political and corporate elites as "the number one reason" China has become "as powerful as they are" as he moves to detangle the state’s finances from China-owned companies.
