Tag: politicians

Rep Nancy Mace accosted at US Capitol by Chicago trans activist, suspect in custody

On Tuesday, South Carolina Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace was accosted on the grounds of the US Capitol. The suspect was taken into custody. Mace said the person was a male trans activist. Mace has made controversy in recent weeks by insisting that women’s bathrooms on Capitol Hill be for women only. After her advocacy, House Speaker Mike Johnson made that an official rule.

“This attack shows how far the Left will go to silence women in our fight against the trans takeover,” Mace told The Post Millennial. “We’ll push harder, move faster, and stand stronger. Let me be clear: I won’t be silenced—not now, not ever.”

After the attack, she was seen wearing a brace.

Keep reading

Why You Need To Stop Defending Mediocre Politicians

For those who religiously follow my work, I rarely ever heap praise on politicians. A political mentor once told me the following: If you don’t have anything negative to say about a politician, don’t say it all.

That makes perfect sense. Politicians receive copious amounts of undeserved praise and attention from sycophantic media outlets and naive voters. Unsurprisingly, the constant stream of praise politicians receive incentivizes them to routinely engage in bad political behavior.

This is particularly relevant when observing the Republican Party’s political trajectory since the end of World War II. What was initially a party founded on protectionism and an emphasis on domestic infrastructure investment in the middle of the 19th century, the GOP has embraced so-called “free trade”, perpetual foreign policy intervention abroad, and slavish devotion to mega-corporations.

Every now and then, there would be movements like the Reagan Revolution, the Buchanan Brigades, the Ron Paul Revolution, and Donald Trump’s America First movement the try to shake things up and move the Republican Party in a markedly anti-establishment direction whether it be nationalism in the cases of Buchanan and Trump or a return to limited government republicanism in the cases of Reagan and Trump.

In each of these cases, energized disgruntled voters took to the campaign trails and the polls, thinking they would be the vanguard of a revolutionary class that would upturn politics. Endorphins ran high and dreams of overturning a corrupt political order were on the minds of these firebrands. However, such optimistic thinking would be dashed once it became clear their efforts would be all for naught.

Within a decade or so they would become jaded by the whole political process. The very politicians they admired would either be assimilated into the establishment Borg or failed to build a viable anti-establishment coalition in government capable of exerting credible political power. The latter point held particularly true with the Ron Paul movement where the former Texas Congressman was quite literally the sole dissenting vote on many of the critical foreign policy and spending issues. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) finds himself on a similar legislative island in the present.

Keep reading

Patriots, Parasites, and the Regime

What motivates patriots to enlist?  Patriots love the idea of America, yes, but first and foremost, they subordinate their love of the intangible to the tangible: their family, friends, and neighbors.  They believe in their fellow Americans so much that they’re not only willing to risk their life for them, they’re yearning to kill the people – “foreign and domestic” – who dare to threaten their fellow Americans.  Patriots feel it their duty to defend what they deem sacred, and that alone should help clarify why rates of enlistment haven’t recovered since the regime desecrated what’s sacred in 2020.

“The government” is often regarded as a saintly organization that cares only for the people it claims to serve; however, contrary to what the reader and author alike have been taught for years, decades, etc. – yes, the brainwashing has been overwhelmingly thorough – the government is not some charitable organization that acts solely based on the citizens’ needs.  No, “the government,” which sounds robotic and deceives the reader, implies that a robot can’t possibly harbor selfish, human nature.  Even the righteous bureaucrat cannot evade “the natural law of parsimony (the most gain for the least effort).”  Like any other organization, “the government” is comprised of people – but not just any people.  “The government” – henceforth, “the regime” and its “parasites” – is, more often than not, comprised of people who worship power.  Yes, “parasite” – like it or not – is the only way to accurately describe someone who lives off of another.  They are not helping their fellow Americans; they are parasitizing and persecuting the very same people they claim to be serving, all the while promising that it’s in our best interest.

Patriots who’ve considered enlisting can see as well as anyone how their would-be employer treats what is sacred, whether it be the intangible – the American way of life – or the tangible: family, friends, and neighbors.  The regime does not care for its fellow Americans, whom they deem annoying, inconvenient, and a threat not to democracy but to their hegemony.  The regime cares only for its fellow parasites – foreign and domestic – not because these are the caring type but because ‘caring’ helps maintain their control.  While the people of Flint, Michigan and East Palestine, Ohio still suffer, the regime cares for Ukraine’s parasites.  While the people of Maui, Hawaii still suffer, the regime cares for Israel’s parasites.  And while the people of Western North Carolina still suffer, the regime tells us that we should be more concerned with the upcoming elections than with caring for our family, friends, or neighbors.  Adding insult to injury, the regime pits our fellow Americans against each other because an angry, divided populace is easier to manipulate than a decentralized but united people.  Not only do we not need the parasites, we cannot flourish with them.

Why are rich doctors flying supplies on their private jets to Western North Carolina?  Isn’t that the regime’s job?  Isn’t that the regime’s only job – to help the people it claims to be serving?  Furthermore, shouldn’t such a selfless act wholly discredit the parasites’ existence?  After all, the rich doctors who donate their time and resources pay more in taxes than most earn as a salary, only to then be coerced to pay the regime to do the job that these doctors are doing themselves.  Again, not only are the parasites not helping us, the greatest opportunity for all materializes only without them.  All of us – parasites included – would be better off if they were to find gainful employment in the real economy instead of living off of us while claiming that we can’t live without them, which, in some instances, they’re no longer even pretending (“no more money, sorry”).  In which scenario is the aspiring military recruit actually helping his family, friends, or neighbors: helping the people of Western North Carolina or killing the people of Western Russia?

The would-be recruit is aware of the fact that the parasites are more than happy to lead our country into war with, say, Russia, Iran, or China than to help Americans.  What did the Iranian people do to your family, friends, or neighbors?  What about the Russian people or the Chinese people?  I doubt that most Americans have great affection for other countries’ people, but do we want to kill them?  No, but that’s what the parasites desire, as dead patriots in foreign lands are less threatening than the bona fide patriots within our borders.  Any escalation of violence between other countries’ parasites and ours is only their ‘business,’ but, curiously, this seems to be the only time that we don’t ‘need’ the parasites; they tell us that they need us (to fight, kill, and be killed).  Due to its unbridled, pathological hubris, the regime is wholly unaware that the potential recruit might wish to do something besides die for it.

Keep reading

Buying Politicians is Easy

Last week, in “The Strange Story of Peter Thiel,” I examined Thiel’s history, from his upbringing in a globe-trotting family to his years at Stanford to the formation of the “Thielverse” to the creation of Palantir.

As you’ll recall from that exploration, by the time disgraced Admiral John Poindexter introduced Thiel (and his creepy Big Brother / Big Data surveillance company, Palantir Technologies) to the US intelligence community, Thiel was a full-fledged deep state actor, amassing power and influence in line with his billions of dollars of wealth.

But as incredible as that meteoric rise to riches and power was, it’s only the very beginning of a decades-long journey through citizenship shopping and shadow presidencies and war profiteering.

This is the continuation of The Strange Story of Peter Thiel.

Keep reading

Will Politicians Toxify Freedom Forever?

The official theme song of the Kamala Harris presidential campaign is “Freedom” by Beyonce. But a more accurate theme would be the Rolling Stones classic, Under my Thumb. Vice President Harris is seeking the presidency as the greatest champion of freedom in modern times. But Kamala-style freedom will only unleash the government, not private citizens.

The original Bill of Rights created a row of bulwarks for citizens to prevent government oppression. In the era of the American Revolution, it was a common saying: “The Restraint of Government is the True Liberty and Freedom of the People.” But Harris and her running mate, Governor Tim Walz, are offering a “freedom,” seemingly inspired by Yugoslavian communist dictator Tito: “The more powerful the State, the more freedom.”

Harris begins by tacitly presuming that politicians must forcibly save humanity. Harris seeks to vastly expand government intervention to supposedly give people true freedom in daily life. Harris’s “freedom” presumes government is irrevocably benevolent—unless you are a bad person who deserves punishment or subjugation or overtaxing. But the definition of “bad” can be endlessly expanded to include anyone who howls about being fleeced, locked down, or muzzled.

Harris-Walz Freedom requires maximum government interference in daily life. Harris called for a merciless crackdown on misinformation, including punishing social media companies that fail to kowtow to Washington. Walz is emphatic that there is no freedom of speech for “misinformation”—a vague notion which can include any statement disapproved by officialdom. When did America’s most distrusted occupation—politicians—become entitled to define truth and to forcibly suppress and punish what they label “misinformation”?

Under the Harris-Walz standard, Americans will only have the freedom to say anything that the government approves. Walz endorsed a 1919 Supreme Court case that upheld imprisoning anyone who criticized military conscription during World War One. The Biden administration was condemned by federal judges for suppressing millions of comments and jokes by Americans about Covid mandates and shutdowns. But according to liberals, that wasn’t censorship because only reactionaries or deplorables complained about pandemic policies. Plus, Fauci is still a saint. 

Mindy Kaling, an actress and emcee for the third night of the Democratic National Convention, invoked “the freedom to work one job and afford your rent.” The Biden administration floated proposals for nationwide rent control and Harris is championing proposals to stop “price gouging.” To achieve true freedom, bureaucrats would commandeer veto power over any contract dealing with housing or food. And when federal price controls caused devastating shortages, that would simply prove that politicians need even more power over daily life. 
At the Democratic National Convention, a Harris campaign video pledged that she would deliver “freedom from extremism.” But that would provide a blank check to suppress any ideas of which politicians disapprove. Newsweek reported last year that the FBI created “a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter: Donald Trump’s army of MAGA followers.” To permit politicians to define extremism is to let them preemptively vilify their most dangerous critics. Two years ago, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre asserted, “When you are not with what majority of Americans are, then you know, that is extreme. That is an extreme way of thinking.” This is a definition of extremism that could put the federal crosshairs on most people who visit this website.

Keep reading

Unmasking the Forgotten Villain: How Robert Doughton’s Secretive Anti-Liberty Agenda Still Haunts America and North Carolina Today

Few politicians have had as lasting and detrimental an impact on U.S. governance as Robert L. Doughton. 

Serving in Congress for over four decades (1911–1953), Doughton helped shape some of the most sweeping expansions of federal power in U.S. history. 

His policies, ranging from supporting high taxes to advocating for massive entitlement programs, left a legacy that prioritized government control over individual liberty. 

Despite being celebrated for his role in projects like the Blue Ridge Parkway, Doughton’s broader impact on personal freedoms and economic freedom casts a long, dark shadow. In examining his career, it becomes clear that Doughton was one of the most damaging figures to the principles of limited government and free markets in U.S. and North Carolina history.

Keep reading

Former Diddy Bodyguard AGAIN Claims Rapper Has Compromising Tapes of Elites

A former bodyguard of Sean “Diddy” Combs has once again claimed that the rapper, accused of sex trafficking and racketeering, has footage of elite politicians engaging in compromising activities.

The bodyguard, Gene Deal, says the secret footage was captured at Diddy’s various so called “freak off” parties, which are claimed to have involved victims being forced to engage in sex acts while Combs masturbated and recorded the events.

He made the repeat claim during a second appearance on The Art of Dialogue  podcast, suggesting that Diddy’s arrest is connected to corrupt city officials in New York.

“You know who else they were doing an investigation on during that whole time period? It was the mayor and the politicians in New York City,” Deal stated.

He added, “They turned around, gave him the key to the city. All the mayor’s people that he brought in here in New York City are resigning. They all resigned.”

Keep reading

Most Americans Want to Stop Arming Israel. Politicians Don’t Care.

When Kamala Harris sat down with CNN’s Dana Bash last month, Bash asked a question: “Would you withhold some U.S. weapons shipments to Israel? That’s what a lot of people on the progressive left want you to do.” 

Harris sidestepped the question, talked about a ceasefire, and ultimately said that she would not change course from the Biden administration’s policy of arming Israel as its war on Gaza enters its 11th month. 

But polls of the American voting population show that she’s ignoring more than just the “progressive left”: A majority of voters support ending arms transfers to Israel, and support for an arms embargo is growing.

“The reality is that the public is far more in favor of stopping arms sales to Israel than opposed,” Yousef Munayyer, head of the Palestine/Israel Program at Arab Center Washington D.C., told The Intercept. He pointed to a June poll from CBS that showed 61 percent of all Americans said the U.S. should not send weapons to Israel, including 77 percent of Democrats and nearly 40 percent of Republicans. 

Poll results have been consistent for months. 

Since the start of the war in Gaza, a majority of Americans have expressed support for some form of restrictions on the U.S. sending weapons to Israel in repeated public surveys. Americans are even more overwhelmingly in favor of a ceasefire.

Among the most consistent string of polls on the issue of weapons transfers to Israel has come from CBS News, which partnered with YouGov to carry out its survey. About two weeks after the October 7 attacks by Hamas, as Israel’s bombardment had already killed more than 2,000 civilians in Gaza, a CBS poll of more than 1,800 Americans found that 52 percent of American adults said the U.S. should not send weapons to Israel. The totals included large majorities among both Democrats and independents, and 43 percent of Republicans. 

In April, CBS News/YouGov asked the same question in a new poll and found that an even larger number of Americans (60 percent), including 68 percent of Democrats, said they felt the U.S. should not send arms to Israel. The poll was conducted days after an Israeli strike killed seven aid workers in a clearly marked World Central Kitchen convoy. 

Keep reading

Who Owns America? Oligarchs Have Bought Up the American Dream

“The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls. They got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear… They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying. Lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else… It’s called the American Dream, ’cause you have to be asleep to believe it.”—George Carlin

Who owns America?

Is it the government? The politicians? The corporations? The foreign investors? The American people?

While the Deep State keeps the nation divided and distracted by a presidential election whose outcome is foregone (the police state’s stranglehold on power will ensure the continuation of endless wars and out-of-control spending, while disregarding the citizenry’s fundamental rights and the rule of law), America is literally being bought and sold right out from under us.

Consider the facts.

Keep reading