Open post

Baby Boomers Get a Bad Rap: Putting Boomers Into Context

Guest Piece by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

A new book by Helen Andrews, Boomers: The Men and Women Who Promised Freedom and Delivered Disaster—and the accompanying review in American Greatness by Chris Buskirk is mostly an accurate snapshot of the generation that followed “the Greatest.” (https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/07/the-baby-boomers-dismal-legacy/)

Mostly.

There is a severe lack of context in judgments about Boomers as disasters. I have not come to praise the Boomers, but to put them in the context of their burial clothes. Without that context, one would mindlessly accept all the criticisms of the Gen-Xers and Millennials (who, so far, have shown no more ability to lead the world out of this morass than my own did).

First, it is true it’s “all about me” when it came to Boomers. The phrase in the 1960s was “if it feels good, do it.” (This was straight out of Roman Epicurean thought, which had its opposite in the Stoics: “If it feels good, don’t do it.”) Yes, much of the literature that has come out has been, as Buskirk puts it, hagigraphic. Yes, they did start celebrating themselves in college, probably with the culminating event in their lives Woodstock as opposed to America landing a man on the moon that same year. The latter was almost all the result of “The Greatest,” the former, entirely laid at the feet of Boomers who were either at the tail end of the “Greatest” or at its beginning. Of the groups that best epitomized Woodstock, think of Crosby, Stills & Nash and Jimi Hendrix. David Crosby (b. 1941), Graham Nash (1942), Steven Stills (1945), and Hendrix (1942) and you have a group who certainly had never even tasted the Great Depression. Their formative years did not start until World War II had ended. Throw in Frank Zappa (1940) and the quintuplet is complete.

Let us also remember that Donald Trump, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, Elton John, Walter Payton, Cal Ripken, Jr., Steve Irwin, George Brett, Adrea Bocelli, Denzel Washington, Peter Jackson, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Sylvester Stallone, Jair Bolsonaro, Mel Gibson, Lionel Ritchie, Jack Ma, Hank Williams, Jr, Benjamin Netanyahu, Kurt Russell and Jordan Peterson are in this group. (So are a lot of baddies I won’t mention . . . cough, cough . . . O. J. Simpson, El Chapo, Jim Carrey, Jeff Bezos, and Ted Bundy). We could put in a dozen names on each side of the ledger.

What’s interesting is that there are fewer truly great entrepreneurs or scientists in the group. This has as much to do with the structure of society since 1950 as it does with any inherent weakness in people.  The fact that so many of the people who deserve notoriety in a positive sense are actors, musicians, or sports figures reflects as much that society had deemed those the best route to success from 1960 on as did did the “Greatest” with business, the military, or medicine. Yet the Boomer scientists gave us the artificial heart, the portable dialysis machine, the ambulatory infusion pump, controlled drug release technology, the universal serial bus port, rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, the music synthesizer, text-to-speech technology, the world wide web, Viagra, DNA fingerprinting, the ethernet, Foxfibre naturally colored cotton, the automated external debifrillator, and the cell phone.

Fred Smith (1944) founded Fed Ex; Robert Kiyosaki (1947) became a leading motivational speaker; Richard Branson (1950), a British businessman; Jeff Bezos founded Amazon; and Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, Apple. The fact that some of these giant companies later became quasi-monopolies or displayed characteristics incompatible with an American Republic was as much a fault of regulators (or even the public that consumed the products) as the creators themselves. After all, J. P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller would have ridden the trusts as far as they could until stopped.

Second, there were powerful forces at work in America in the 1950s that shaped most of the Boomers as they entered college. And more of them entered college than any other previous generations. As the river of Boomers washed ashore on campuses in 1961-62, it was met by two other equally powerful steams. One was the massive influx of cash into colleges and universities due to the 1957-instigated reaction to the USSR’s Sputnik satellite. That money was meant for science and math, but once funds enter a university, they spread to the area of greatest power, namely the Humanities. (Americans, in their wisdom, had concluded that it was absolutely critical to teach everyone how to write well, speak well, and know their history.) At that same time, however, the wave of students and wave of money met a third tributary flowing the same direction, a newly-unleashed population of leftist professors who had been banned during the McCarthy era but, in the post-McCarthy backlash, were not only tolerated but welcomed on campus.

These “three streams” that converged, as Michael Allen and I wrote in A Patriot’s History of the United States, meant that more kids than ever would be coming out of school with degrees in something less likely to actually manufacture or produce anything and much more likely to emerge with an attitude somewhat hostile to the idea of America itself. A resulting shift away from invention, science, math, industry, and production and into arts, music, sports, finance, insurance, and writing led to the relative poor comparison to the “Titans of Prosperity” who led the phenomenal growth of the late 1800s. That is to say, it’s not all on the Boomers: they worked within the system they had, which was created by the “Greatest” in hopes of sparing Boomers from the hard life the “Greatest” faced.

All of which brings me to the constant comparison with the “Greatest”: yes, the “Greatest” generation did win World War II and Korea. Did they really have an alternative? But consider that in doing so, they were required by the government to adopt certain lifestyles that without war it’s unlikely they would have chosen. For example, the Second World War forced Americans (both in the armed forces and civilians at home) to save at unprecedented levels. There was nothing to spend money on because of rationing and because the government had shut down production of all but war-related goods. For more than four years, Americans saved their paychecks in the most remarkable forced-savings burst in American history. When they emerged from the war, they let loose with a frenzy of home buying and auto purchases. At the same time, young men were required to adopt “manly” and traditional roles as protectors, heroes, providers, and producers. Again, there was no alternative. The process involving male development—manly, masculine developmen—was not optional. Thus those who wax romantic about the “Greatest” need to ask, “Would they have been so great if it were not forced on them?” And, “would other generations rise to the occasion if such were forced on them?”

Andrews’ book is the equivalent of Paul Johnson’s Intellectuals (1988) that dissected many of the leading thinkers of the pre-modern era, mostly in a negative context. Johnson apparently felt so badly about how he assessed genius (even malevolent) that he followed up with a much more positive work, Creators (2006). While Buskirk and Andrews lament the “spend, spend, spend” mentality, they seem to ignore the fact that to spend, spend, spend you have to make, make, make. Home prices (and Boomer wealth) rose, yes, in part to loose federal regulations but to a far greater degree because Boomers (thanks to the auto) were far more mobile than any previous generation and because they literally bought into the American dream of home ownership.

Finally, before bashing Boomers, one might ask: what the hell have the Gen-Xers, the Millennials, and the iGeners done to improve things? The Millennials’ view is that of “social justice” through group action—but not real individual sacrifice. About the only Greenie I can think of who actually lived his ideology was Ed Begley, Jr. who composted and lived “small.” Millennials and a handful of Gen-Xers had their hands on the levers of government and the machinery of regulation for years, yet under their watch not only did the housing boom turn into a collapse in 2007-08, but their regulations largely caused it. Their do-good environmental restrictions have resulted in more people dying due to lack of energy and fewer people crawling out of poverty—all so they can feel like they “made a difference.”

Sorry. Don’t rag on Boomers to me. I am one. Mike Allen and I made our contribution with A Patriot’s History of the United States. What did you do, little Millennial?

 

Larry Schweikart is the co-author with Michael Allen of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States, is the author of Reagan: The American President, and created the Wild World of History curriculum website with full curricula for U.S. and World history including teacher guides, student workbooks, maps/answer keys, maps/images, and video lessons accompanying every unit (www.wildworldofhistory.com).

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

“Demolition Man”: A Movie 28 Years Ahead of its Time

Guest Piece by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

Demolition Man World

Current events have many people dredging up George Orwell’s 1984 or Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.

Perhaps.

But the current state of America—and much of the world, it seems—is closer to the (in retrospect) great 1993 movie Demolition Man starring Sylvester Stallone as the wrongly-accused Lieutenant John Spartan, condemned to frozen hybernation for collateral damage to civilians, and his nemesis Simon Phoenix (a blond-haired Wesley Snipes). A terrific supporting cast included Benjamin Bratt, Nigel Hawthorne, Bob Gunton, Dennis Leary, and Rob Schneider not to mention a smokin’ Sandra Bullock. Spartan, who captured Simon Phoenix in 1996, is thawed out when Phoenix escapes during a probation hearing. Snipes’ Phoenix is thoroughly brutal and ruthless, yet always with a dash of Joker-esque manic humor. Stallone’s John Spartan is also quite funny, mainly for what he doesn’t get about the 21st century (especially the use of three seashells for, er, cleaning onesself after a #2). Reiner’s character finds it hysterical: “He doesn’t know how to use the shells.”

Demolition Man, though, was oddly prescient. As both Phoenix and Spartan arrive 36 years after the Big Freeze, they find a world that is nearly perfect. There is so little crime that police are armed only with stun-wands and the public is so docile that simple commands—“Stop right there!”—actually elicit compliance. All grounds are beautifully manicured. People (in San Angeles—note that City of the Angles has now become the city of Saint Angels)) walk around in long robes and fine dining is at Taco Bell, which in the food consolidation Franchise Wars beat out all competitors. It takes no time for Simon Phoenix to realize that this new, de-testicled world, is ripe for plunder. He doesn’t hesitate to beat up officers, blow up one of their electric cars by dropping a stun-wand into the fuel-charger socket, and, yes, killing people, which triggers a “187.” This code is so antiquated that only the oldest sergeant can interpret it: “MurderDeathKill.” During his cryostasis, Phoenix picked up a host of new abilities, including advanced karate and other violent skills, making him more than a match for any half-dozen of the useless London Bobbies who seek to restrain him. Soon it dawns on Chief George Earle (Gunton) that he needs something his department doesn’t possess: a cop as ruthless as Phoenix. John Spartan is taken out of the deep freeze and reports for duty to the police station where he befriends Lenina Huxley (Bullock).

The new world in which he finds himself has ubiquitous devices to dispense fines for profanity (and, one suspects, other things such as spitting on the sidewalk or not using a turn signal . . . or wearing a mask). Riding with Huxley and patrolman Garcia (Bratt), Spartan is both bemused and disgusted that their idea of fun is singing along to radio commercials of the 1960s. When finally, after displaying his manly attributes to Huxley in defeating baddies, Spartan is invited to have sex, he is chagrined to find that all physical contact is verboten. (Even in celebrating, instead of high fives, Bullock and Reiner stop their hands inches apart and “wax on, wax off” in the air). Something that seemed innocently ridiculous in 1996 has now become a reality in China Virus America.

Demolition Man Society is a two-tiered structure. The Haves and the Have-nots. The Haves live above ground, dine at chez Taco Bell, dress well, are, of course, uber clean and socially proper. They are, appropriately, led by a scientist, Dr. Cocteau (Dr. Cock Toe?) who has a “trust the science” approach to everything. The Have-nots live underground. They are smelly, deplorable urban hill-billies who eat ratburgers, bathe infrequently, speak their minds, curse, and, yes, know all about weapons. Their leader, the appropriately-named Edgar Friendly (Dennis Leary) is the symbol of freedom in the film. As powerful as the Haves are, they dare not go to Friendly’s subterranean Deplorable dwellings, for even their military might isn’t sufficient there. (This, of course, doesn’t mention the fact that their military might is an emasculated, feminized army of transgender scientifically-approved fem-bots with stun-wands.)

Ultimately, only the brutal masculinity of John Spartan can defeat Phoenix. An appropriate chase scene with Phoenix in the Tesla-electric car and Spartan in an Olds 442 ensues as they both head to a final battle in the cryoprison. (It is fitting that the future of hell is not flames, but a frozen void . . . created by a planetary response to global warming?) Sparan defeats Phoenix by firing cryo-plasm at him, then knocking his frozen head off. In the end, Phoenix was not human, but prehistoric ice.

Before being detached from his head, it is revealed, Phoenix had in fact made an alliance with Dr. Cocteau, who has programmed Phoenix in such a way that he was prohibited from killing Cocteau. Phoenix evades this command by simply having his lackeys murder the good doctor. Even the pure and seemingly noble scientist, with the best intentions for humankind, needed the thuggish Phoenix to implement perfection. And the creation turned on the creator.

For all its predictable jokes and the sometimes over-the-top cackling by Snipes (who was still basking in the glow of his performance as Nino Brown in “New Jack City”), “Demolition Man” has proven a prescient vision of the future from 1996. Let’s hope a John Spartan and an Edgar Friendly can join forces in real life to spare us from Dr. Cocteau’s perfect world.

 

Larry Schweikart is the co-author, with Michael Allen, of the New York Times #1 bestseller A Patriot’s History of the United States, author of Reagan: The American President, and founder of the Wild World of History curriculum website that features full U.S. and World History

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever before. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge. It’s the tool I use to help keep up with all the day’s events, and it should be your tool, too.

Open post

No, Texas Is Not “In Play” **UPDATED** Trump Train Runs Biden/Harris Out of Texas

We have seen lots of media reports and media-sponsored polls over the past two weeks pushing the narrative that Texas is somehow “in play” for the Biden/Harris Harris/Biden campaign this year. The only problem with these reports is that they are not supported by a shred of actual early voting information.

Take the early voting data compiled by Target Smart as a prime example. TargetSmart shows that Republican turnout is vastly exceeding Democrat turnout in Texas by an even larger margin than Republicans ran up in 2016: 51.3% R, 38.9% D, and 9.9% unaffiliated. That margin is 2% larger than in 2016, when Trump won Texas by a 9% margin.

Other than polls paid for by media outlets for the sole purpose of creating a story, what indicator do we have that some huge chunk of Republican voters are rebelling against President Trump in Texas? The answer to that would be NONE. Not a shred of real hard data exists to support that claim.

One of the media/Democrats’ favorite piece of Texas-related propaganda is the narrative that there is some big anti-Trump revolt in the state among suburban women. First of all, I live in Texas, am a voracious consumer of news, and have yet to see any newspaper or local TV station identify and interview a single such suburban housewife. If these women are all over the place, why isn’t anyone pushing this narrative in the media finding them and talking to them?

Second, TargetSmart also breaks its data down by County. Frequent contributor Larry Schweikart tweeted out some of that suburban data this morning:

Then there is the new data coming in across the country showing that the percentage of non-college educated white voters is far higher this year than it was in 2016. This is the segment of voters who turned out in droves in PA, MI and WI four years ago and served as Trump’s winning margin. Their massive turnout was not replicated in other states that year. This year, it appears that this voter segment’s outrage over having been ridiculed, slandered and portrayed as “privileged” racists for the last four years is motivating them to turn out all over the nation.

Folks, that voter segment is a huge part of the voter base in Texas.

At the end of the day, we are left with the unarguable fact that the only indicator that Texas might be closer this year than it was in 2016 – when it was not close at all – is a raft of polls that were paid for by media outlets for the purpose of creating “news” stories.

Trump will win Texas, and he will win this election on Tuesday.

 

**UPDATE**

Just for good measure, the Trump Train literally ran the Biden campaign out of Texas earlier today:

God Bless Texas.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Friday News Roundup: Why Donald Trump Will be a Two-Term President **UPDATED**

Note to Joe: When you’re bitching about the size of the other guy’s crowd, you’re behind. – Creepy Uncle Quid Pro China Traitor Joe Biden is so concerned about the size and number of Trump rallies that yesterday he accused the President and his rallies of being “super-spreader events” for the China Virus. That accusation comes without a shred of evidence of being true, of course, but no U.S. media outlet would dare to point that truth out. Because objective truth is anathema to our Nazi-style media/propaganda establishment these days.

But Trump supporters should rejoice in Biden’s complaint, because if you’re complaining about the size of the other guy’s crowds while speaking to a near-empty parking lot with maybe 50 cars in it while he’s speaking to a rally of 15,000 people in the very same city you’re in, that is a great indicator that you are losing.

Creepy Uncle McWifeMolester is, of course, going all-in on joining the corrupt news media in spreading China Virus fear porn as a last resort to stem the Trump-led Red Tide in key battleground states. Because, in reality, that is all he has left.

Yesterday’s incredible report that 3rd Quarter U.S. economic growth came in at a staggering 33% puts the lie to Biden’s false claims about Trump’s economic record, proving conclusively that America is indeed in the midst of the V-shaped recovery the President promised despite the best efforts of communist Democrat governors to create a massive economic depression. The signing of peace deals with Israel by four different Arab states in the Middle East with several more poised to do the same soon demonstrates that the Trump foreign policy is causing peace to break out all over in regions where the Obama/Biden Administration had done nothing but actively foment more conflict.

As this campaign winds down, Traitor Joe is plumb out of ammunition, and coronavirus fear porn is all he’s got.

Glorious.

Huge decision in Minnesota. – In a 2-1 ruling, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ordered yesterday that all mail-in ballots received after 8 p.m. on Election Day be set aside, setting the stage for a potential legal battle after the election. The order stopped short of a final determination on the validity of the post-Election Day ballots, but the order to segregate them potentially indicates the direction in which the 8th Circuit is inclined to rule.

And here’s the thing: if the 8th Circuit rules for the Democrats and their vote-stealing plans, we now have a valid 5-4 majority on the Supreme Court poised to reverse it.

This new reality set Amy Klobuchar off into a panic:

Awesome.

Early voting trends continue to move in Trump’s favor. – In addition to the great early voting news coming out of the key states of Florida, North Carolina and others, Larry Schweikart cited a new, potentially consequential trend taking hold in Virginia, Arizona and Colorado yesterday:

**UPDATE** Oh, my, oh, my, oh, my, my, my – this trend is also happening in a very big way in…wait for it…NEW MEXICO:

Holy smokes.

This all supports my theory that America is about to experience what its first “outrage election” looks like. One of the main demographic groups that has failed in the past to turn out in big numbers is the white, non-college educated, lower-to-middle-class voter. Especially the men in that group.

This was the demographic that did show up in big numbers for Trump in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania in 2016, and they essentially were the difference in the entire election. Now, we appear to be seeing this same demographic of voters, disenchanted by the media/Democrat propaganda merchants calling them all racists for years now, sick of being lectured by multi-millionaire athletes like Lebron James about the ‘white privilege’ they have never personally experienced in their own lives, and outraged by all the riots and street violence they have witnessed on their televisions over the past 5 months, apparently now quietly coming out to vote en masse to express their displeasure with our culture’s prevailing status quo.

If we all wake up next Wednesday to the news that President Trump has scored upset wins in Colorado and/or Virginia (he was always going to win Arizona), we will likely see evidence of this great “silent majority” everyone’s been speculating about.

This is a very big deal, as Larry pointed out:

New Trafalgar polls show Trump momentum in key swing states. – Regarding Larry’s last question up there, as far as I can tell, this higher-than-normal turnout among white, working class voters is not a trend that any pollster, not even the Trafalgar Group, has made a point of trying to capture. Which is in part why the new swing state polling released by Trafalgar on Tuesday is so incredibly encouraging.

Here are those new polls:

In Michigan, Trump leads by 2.5%:

In Nevada, Trump trails by just 2.3% and the gap is narrowing:

Trump now leads by 2.7% in Florida:

Biden leads by just 3.2% in the very, very Blue state of Minnesota:

Trump trails by just .4% in Wisconsin:

And finally, Trump leads by .8% in the most critical state, Pennsylvania:

All of the momentum and every key indicator outside of the corrupt, media-sponsored polls is behind President Trump in this election.

I’ve told you since Day 1 that Donald Trump would serve two consecutive terms in office, and I see no reason to revise that prediction today.

Glorious.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Thursday News Roundup: Early Voting Trends are Going Trump’s Way

Early voting trends bode well for Trump. – For those who, like me, are obsessing over the early voting trends in key swing states, frequent contributor Larry Schweikart has a very good piece posted up at UncoverDC.com this morning.

Here’s an excerpt from that piece:

As the Democrat lead in the Vote By Mail (VBM) mounted two weeks ago, many Republicans panicked. Not only do Democrats usually lead in “early” voting (which includes both VBM and “In-Person Early Voting,” or IPEV), but this year in particular—with the China Virus—their emphasis on VBM has resulted in stunning voting levels. So far.

Then, suddenly, the Democrats peaked. On or around October 16, their VBM numbers, especially in Florida, began to slow. Although they had one last burst for the “Souls to the Polls” of October 24-25, it was their last gasp. When IPEV started in Florida, Republicans came out like a mighty wave, rolling over the Democrats. To date, they have over 1.3 million in-person voters. (The Democrats have not been, to use Joe Biden’s term, “chumps” at this, turning out 945,000 in-person early voters, but they are steadily losing ground). Democrats had built a 615,000 lead before the Red Charge, and now lead in total votes in Florida only by 242,102. While the pace of Republican voting is breathtaking—at one point they were adding 6,000 votes per hour—they are now on a pace to be well ahead of 2016, when Hillary Clinton entered election day with an 88,000 lead in the Sunshine State.

Ponder that. Despite the most extensive early vote/VBM campaign in history by the Democrats, Republicans are as of today poised to lead by election day. Even more astounding, they are within a mere 8,000 votes overall of winning Miami-Dade County. And right now Republicans in every county from Pensacola to the western border of Jacksonville at or above 98% of their 2016 levels (except Bay, Butler, and Leon which started later), but in these same counties Democrat turnout is lagging.

[End]

There is much more good news in several other states, so go read the full piece. You’ll feel better after you’ve done so.

Larry added one more tasty tidbit regarding Arizona on his Twitter feed late last night:

We are also having very strong early voting turnout in my home state of Texas, where the media has been heavily touting the potential for the Democrats to somehow turn the state blue in this election, just as the media has touted in every Texas election since 2008.

Some of you have no doubt been concerned by the recent fake poll paid for by the Dallas Morning News showing Biden ahead in Texas. Below is the estimate of early votes already cast in Texas by TargetSmart, a Democrat firm, which uses a formula that has proven to be accurate to estimate this in states, like Texas, that don’t require voters to register their party affiliation

As you can see, according to this Democrat firm, R voters are 18% ahead of D voters in early and mail-in balloting, which amounts to over 1 MILLION votes. Also understand that far more Rs are planning to vote in person on election day than Ds are. Texas will not be close, and Trump will win.

Stop worrying about Texas. There are plenty of other places to worry about – like Wisconsin, Virginia, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

So, how’s the Biden/Harris Harris/Biden campaign going? – While President Donald Trump was speaking before a crowd of 23,000 Arizonans in Bullhead City (total population, 40,000), Kamala Harris was speaking before a pretend audience that the media wouldn’t even show because it was so pitifully paltry.

But that’s only part of the story. Check out this video clip of the stage getting set up for her 30 seconds before she was scheduled to speak.

Surreal. Absolutely surreal.

But what about Michigan? – Yesterday, some media-sponsored fake poll came out showing Biden/Harris Harris/Biden with a whopping 17-point lead in Michigan. So, if the Biden/Harris Harris/Biden camp really believed that poll, wouldn’t they be skipping Michigan to campaign in more fertile territory? Say, maybe North Carolina or Pennsylvania one more time?

Of course, they would. But that poll is as fake as Jake Tapper’s furrowed brow, so not only will Creepy Uncle McNastyFinger emerge from his basement lair to travel there for a Saturday rally, but he announced he will be bringing Barack Hussein Obama His Own Self with him.

So, what about Michigan? Well, the truth is that President Trump is ahead there, like he told that Arizona crowd yesterday, and as we all know, Barack Hussein Obama has no magic wand that would enable him to turn back that Red tide.

As for yesterday, Quid Pro China Joe did get out into public, making it all the way to a polling place to cast a vote IN PERSON:

My guess is that he just wanted to go see who was running for president this time. Imagine his surprise.

He will not stop this until someone stops him. – We’ve seen lots of stories this week about President Trump having a growing list of high-level officials to be purged from the federal government shortly after he wins re-election for a second term in office. That list is rumored to include worthless hacks like Christopher Wray, roadblocks to truth and transparency like CIA Director Gina Haspel, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Esper.

Everyone should hope and pray that the name of the little societal menace, Anthony Fauci, also makes its way onto that list of terminations. I’ve been telling you since March that Fauci’s obvious goal related to COVID-19 is to extend the pain on the American people for as long as he can get away with.

On Tuesday, Fauci told an audience in Australia that is new goal is to extend the pain all the way into 2022, as reported by NewsMax:

It’s not likely that life will return to “some semblances of normalcy” before the end of next year, or even until 2022, even though a vaccine is near, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci.

“If we get a vaccination campaign, and by the second or third quarter of 2021 we have vaccinated a substantial proportion of the people, I think it will be easily by the end of 2021, and perhaps even into the next year, before we start having some semblances of normality,” Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said during a University of Melbourne panel, CNN reported Wednesday.

[End]

So, here we see the little menace trying to extend his vauted “15 days to flatten the curve” into a destructive set of restrictions on life and the economy for two solid years. Given the chance, he will be talking about extending it into 2024 just a few months from now.

President Trump desperately needs to not give him that chance. This little menace cannot be purged from our presence soon enough.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Schweikart: What to Watch for on Election Night

Guest Piece by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

Confession: I rarely watch conservative, or so-called conservative, news sites. You can get some information that way, but I find it much more instructive to watch the reactions of liberals to the stories of the day. That is an instant indicator of who is winning and losing. For example, if the Washington Post says “Trump must change tone or face loss,” you know that Trump’s tone is deadly effective. Or, if Politico headlines “Some Senator Say McConnell Moving Too Fast on Barrett Nomination,” you know that Yertle is moving at light speed (for a tortoise) and that the confirmation is assured.

So on election night, what are the signals that Donald Trump is winning or losing?

  • Expect any blue state that they can call for Joe Biden will be called within a nanosecond of the polls closing. You can expect Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts to be called immediately.

However, if you do not get instant calls on such states as Virginia or Pennsylvania, then it’s a fight. Most expect because of the vote by mail/early voting in the Keystone State that ballots will be counted for days. But Virginia may be a different story. On election night 2016, Virginia’s call was late as Trump led well into the night until the Northern Virginia area finally came in. Rule of thumb: if they can call a state for Biden, they will do so as fast as humanly possible.

  • Expect the Florida call, despite an obvious Trump win there, to be delayed as much as they can. I expect Trump will win Florida by at least 250,000 votes. Full disclosure: I said this in 2016 and was surprised the margin was closer. Nevertheless, there will be a moment when all that remains on the Florida map is a sea of northern red counties and the Panhandle.
  • Watch Michigan. Michigan doesn’t have “Republican” and “Democrat” ballots so tracking voter registration is tough there. I have relied on “TargetSmart,” a Democrat outfit that uses “modeling” to predict votes. How does this work? Well, if you are white, older, a gun owner, non-college educated or only two-year college educated, go to church, TargetSmart will label you a Republican. If you’re an urban black female, you will immediately be tossed in the Democrat box. Michigan has steadily not only trended toward Trump but also John James, who now has a two-point lead in his senate race. It’s inconceivable that Trump would trail James, so it’s reasonable to guess that Trump is up at least two in Michigan (as some of today’s polls suggest). Michigan has a Republican legislature, has far fewer outstanding ballots than does Pennsylvania, and is much more likely to be called early. Michigan, this year, will likely be the first breach in “Hillary’s blue wall” (as they referred to the Rust Belt trio of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.) An early Michigan call means the only hope Biden would have would be an upset in Arizona and regaining Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, while holding Nevada, Minnesota, and all the other traditionally blue states.
  • Once Michigan is called and Arizona is grudgingly assigned to Trump, I think even the Hoax News networks will have to call the election. I think we will know the winner that night. Once that happens, Pennsylvania’s delayed ballots become irrelevant and may be wrapped up quickly.

As you may know, Richard Baris—America’s most accurate pollster along with Trafalgar—and Tracy Beanz and I will be doing a live election night webcast. We expect to be able to call these races sooner than the legacy media. However, some other things to watch for:

  • The John James, Thom Tillis, and Tina Smith senate races. If James and Tillis win, Trump will almost certainly carry those states. If Smith is struggling, Jason Lewis may sneak into a seat that a month ago was on no one’s radar. Then all eyes turn to Martha McSally and Susan Collins. If those two Republican ladies survive, Republicans would be looking at a net gain in the senate of two. The only current nearly-sure loser among Republican senators is Colorado’s Cory Gardner—but even he has a spark of life, given that his opponent, John Hickenlooper, has committed more errors than the Bad News Bears. He may still screw up a race that was all but won.
  • The black and 18-24 turnout. Some pundits are trying to claim that the “Yut” vote is up this year. Well, I never thought of a 29 year-old as a “youth.” These surveys include as “young people” 18-29, whereas all my predictions were specific to college-aged kids, 18-24. That age group is most definitely down. Also, if the black turnout is down (as it already appears to be in North Carolina), this will allow for much earlier modeling and predictions about outstanding races.

Finally, if the networks don’t call the House at 8:01 as Fox News did in 2018, we will probably be looking at a tight race for 17-20 seats that would decide control. But if you tune into CNN by mistake and they all have glum faces, you don’t need to wait for the state by state calls.

Larry Schweikart is the co-author, with Michael Allen, of the New York Times #1 Bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States, author of Reagan: The American President, and founder of the Wild World of History, a history curriculum website featuring full courses in US History and World History Since 1775, including teacher’s guide, student workbook, maps/graphs/charts, tests/answer keys, and video lessons accompanying every unit (www.wildworldofhistory.com).

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Thursday News Roundup: Joe Biden, Not-so-Secret Agent for China

Because real, actual voting data is better than polling data. – Our good friend and frequent contributor Larry Schweikart has a terrific piece over at UncoverDC.com this morning, covering a multitude of early voting data. Here’s an excerpt:

In yesterday’s [Florida] Vote By Mail, the Democrats continued to add ballots—at a rate of about 3% per day. A poster to www.freerepublic.com, “SpeedyinTexas,” has been working off assumptions based on 81% Democrat turnout and 2016 numbers that put the Democrats’ target for VBMs at a lead of 653,000. That would overcome the 2016 Trump advantage and the anticipated Republican lead in “In-Person Early Voting” (i.e., walk-ins or IPEV) of 359,000. That number would constitute 55% of the Democratic lead and would make the final lead for the Democrats by election day of 294,000. This number, Speedy argues, Republicans can overcome on election day with a 2016 level turnout.

What happens if they “keep comin’?” If they continue to hold a pace of 3% per day, the Democrats would hit the turnout rate of 84%. Such a turnout would be hard for Republicans to overcome. Moreover, the VBM ballots provided, but not yet voted, are 1.2m for Democrats and 926,000 for Republicans, so in ballots still outstanding the Democrats can extend their lead. And, if current trends continue, Republicans would fall just short of their 359,000 goal by about 10-15,000. Analyst Nate Silver, however, has argued that the Democrats need to reach a 70/30 split by election day to have a chance: right now it’s 54-49 returned ballots. That is well short.

Probably a more realistic final turnout will be 82% R and 79% D, which would be an R advantage of 70,000 votes. Again, none of this accounts for Democrats voting for Trump, or Republicans voting for Biden. But I think the weight is on the side of the former. Consider Miami-Dade County which is heavily Hispanic. The D/R Hispanic split yesterday was a mere 1,000 votes (and again, many of these Florida Hispanics will be voting for Trump). Today Miami has a 28% R turnout—unheard of.

[End]

Go read the whole thing. You’ll glad – and better educated – for doing so.

Masks for thee but not for me. It’s the liberal way. – Chris “Fredo” Cuomo, who has become one of the media’s most detestable mask scolds during the China Virus pandemic, was once again revealed to be a raging hypocrite on Wednesday. Hey, what else is new?

Turns out Fredo is a serial violator of his Manhattan apartment building’s mask policy, and Tucker Carlson got ahold of a letter he had recently received from his landlord threatening a $500 fine if he continues his scofflaw ways. Here is part of what that letter says:

“You have been observed entering and exiting the building and riding the elevator without the required face coverings,” reads part of the August 6 letter.

“Even though staff members have asked you to comply with this requirement, you have refused to do so. This is a violation of the Executive Order, building policy, and places other residents and our staff at risk. There are no exceptions to this rule, and you are required to comply.”

[End]

Fredo, of course, has been repeatedly captured maskless on video while out in public, both during and since his infamous – and probably faked – personal bout with the viral gift from China. He is indeed one of America’s most raging hypocrites and fakes, but hey, he works for CNN, so that’s just part of the gig.

More bad news for the Bidens. – One of Hunter Biden’s “business partners,” Lt. Tony Bobulinski, has grown weary of covering for the Bidens’ bullshit. Mr. Bobulinski has become fairly famous over the past week, as his name apparently can be found all over Hunter’s infamous laptop, and he doesn’t want said fame.

Thus, he released a statement on Wednesday, which Fox’s John Roberts tweeted out in full last night:

Courtesy of the still-banned-by-Twitter New York Post, here is the full text of that letter:

My name is Tony Bobulinski. The facts set forth below are true and accurate; they are not any form of domestic or foreign disinformation. Any suggestion to the contrary is false and offensive. I am the recipient of the email published seven days ago by the New York Post which showed a copy to Hunter Biden and Rob Walker. That email is genuine.

This afternoon I received a request from the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs and the Senate Committee on Finance requesting all documents relating to my business affairs with the Biden family as well as various foreign entities and individuals. I have extensive relevant records and communications and I intend to produce those items to both Committees in the immediate future.

I am the grandson of a 37 year Army Intelligence officer, the son of a 20+ year career Naval Officer and the brother of a 28 year career Naval Flight Officer. I myself served our country for 4 years and left the Navy as LT Bobulinski. I held a high level security clearance and was an instructor and then CTO for Naval Nuclear Power Training Command. I take great pride in the time my family and I served this country. I am also not a political person. What few campaign contributions I have made in my life were to Democrats.

Enlarge ImageTony Bobulinski
Tony Bobulinski

If the media and Big Tech companies had done their jobs over the past several weeks I would be irrelevant in this story. Given my long standing service and devotion to this great country, I could no longer allow my family’s name to be associated or tied to Russian disinformation or implied lies and false narratives dominating the media right now.

After leaving the military I became an institutional investor investing extensively around the world and on every continent. I have traveled to over 50 countries. I believe, hands down, we live in the greatest country in the world.

What I am outlining is fact. I know it is fact because I lived it. I am the CEO of Sinohawk Holdings which was a partnership between the Chinese operating through CEFC/Chairman Ye and the Biden family. I was brought into the company to be the CEO by James Gilliar and Hunter Biden. The reference to “the Big Guy” in the much publicized May 13, 2017 email is in fact a reference to Joe Biden. The other “JB” referenced in that email is Jim Biden, Joe’s brother.

Hunter Biden called his dad ‘the Big Guy’ or ‘my Chairman,’ and frequently referenced asking him for his sign-off or advice on various potential deals that we were discussing. I’ve seen Vice President Biden saying he never talked to Hunter about his business. I’ve seen firsthand that that’s not true, because it wasn’t just Hunter’s business, they said they were putting the Biden family name and its legacy on the line.

I realized the Chinese were not really focused on a healthy financial ROI. They were looking at this as a political or influence investment. Once I realized that Hunter wanted to use the company as his personal piggy bank by just taking money out of it as soon as it came from the Chinese, I took steps to prevent that from happening.

The Johnson Report connected some dots in a way that shocked me — it made me realize the Bidens had gone behind my back and gotten paid millions of dollars by the Chinese, even though they told me they hadn’t and wouldn’t do that to their partners.

I would ask the Biden family to address the American people and outline the facts so I can go back to being irrelevant — and so I am not put in a position to have to answer those questions for them.

I don’t have a political ax to grind; I just saw behind the Biden curtain and I grew concerned with what I saw. The Biden family aggressively leveraged the Biden family name to make millions of dollars from foreign entities even though some were from communist controlled China.

God bless America.

[End]

Oh. Well, then.

God Bless America, indeed.

As Creepy Sleepy China Joe McNastyFinger likes to say, “look, here’s the deal”: A vote for Joe Biden is a vote for the subjugation of the United States of America to the Communist Chinese overlords. It is a vote for full surrender, because China Joe’s nickname is not a joke: It’s for real, folks. It is who he is. He is hopelessly compromised. There is no question about this.

Get your butts out there and vote to save this country. Get out and vote for Donald J. Trump. At this point, that is your patriotic duty to your country.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Schweikart: Dem Plan to Steal the Presidency Runs Into a Solid Wall of Harsh Reality

Frequent contributor and America’s history teacher, Larry Schweikart, put up a long thread on Twitter last night that is so good that I ask for and got his permission to share it here. I would give you a summary, but it’s self-explanatory and laid out in a style that only Larry can deliver, so why waste the time?

Just read it – you’ll be glad you did.

Here is the text from the rest of the 22 tweets:

2) They probably thought, “OK, we’ll squirrel him away, keep him out of public sight, and let Kampuchea handle the load.”

Mistake #1. She was an instant bomb, and was actually worse than Demented Perv Biteme.

3) At the same time, they thought they could use the Vote By Mail (VBM) scheme to extend voting way past Nov. 3.

While I don’t think they seriously believed this, some of them no doubt thought they could drag it past Dec. 13.

I think some lawyers finally did some ‘splainin.

4) So initially (again, I’m guessing April/May) their plan was to VBM the hell out of the system then string it along with the complicity of the Blue Govs.

5) Enter the GOP and the courts.

6) This was squashed faster than a Milli Vanilli reunion tour.

7) Moreover, the wizards of smart in the DNC failed to grasp that if they scare the oldsters to death and have them VBM, they won’t have anyone voting on election day.

8) But wait! It gets even better!

Because they have “pre-voted” (like pre-boarding an airplane. As George Carlin says, how do you “pre-board?”), ALL OF THEIR VOTES ARE TALLIED EARLY. They will be the first ones on the board on election day.

9) Moreover, people have been watching these come in for months. Nate Cohnhole has been breathlessly watching the numbers rise, failing to understand it’s like a 440 meter race with staggered starts. The GOP “lane” is mostly on ED. Yeah, it “looks” like the outside lane is ahead.

10) Here’s my point: THIS IS ALL PUBLIC. ALL DISCUSSED. ALL KNOWN.

The DemoKKKrats have no hats from which to pull rabbits on election day.

11) This nullifies another of their poorly thought-out strategy of VBM, namely to claim fraud.

12) Even for their most disingenuous hacks, it will be pretty hard to claim fraud when only 3% of the DemoKKKrat ballots are still outstanding and they are losing by 5%.

13) It will be a case of, “Even if we say ALL the outstanding ballots are for Biteme, he still loses.”

14) So whatever quidspickel genius in the DNC dreamed up this particular scam, he should be Robespierred.

15) And, perhaps juciest of all, the very nature of reporting, even by the punkpidgels at CNN, MSNBC, and Faux, will be to report what is HAPPENING.

16) You know what’s going to be happening on election day?

Republicans are going to be voting.

Pretty much ONLY Republicans are going to be voting. Overwhelmingly Republicans are going to be voting.

17) It will be near impossible for any Hoax News org NOT to report that, no matter how they spin it. The momentum is going to build on election day that the GOP tidal wave has come. “We never expected this!”

18) It will be made manifest in so many states, in so many races, that it will be impossible NOT to call these states for Trump.

They can look forlornly at 1/2% outstanding absentee ballots that amount to 5,000 or to Trump’s 180,000 lead, or 400,000 lead.

19) This is so delicious. They not only screwed their candidate with a moronic strategy that makes Minion’s “ORCA” look like a good idea, but they screwed their post-election day strategy AND their media election day strategy.

20) As per 10/11 court cases so far, they have to stop counting no later than Nov. 6. They gave the Rs time to mount court challenges and, equally important,

WHAT HAVE YOU NOT BEEN HEARING ABOUT?

21) Amy Coney Barrett.

Why? Cuz she is going to be confirmed and they can’t stop it, and ANY of these cases that gets to the USSC after Nov. 3 on an expedited basis will get squashed faster than Cubans in Grenada.

22) I’m telling you, if they thought Cankles’ campaign was a cluster you-know-what, the post-mortems on this one will see DemoKKKrat strategists exiled to horror spots . . .

like Macon, Georgia, or Bullhead City, Arizona.

23) It’s a beautiful thing.
[End]
A beautiful thing, indeed. Glorious, even.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Election 2024: Between a Rock and Yeezus

[Note: Thanks to all of you commenters for creating the only original content on this site for the past four days while I was in the hospital (see this morning’s Discussion Post for further info on that). I am home now and will resume creating original content of my own on Friday morning. But until then, enjoy this guest piece by the great Larry Schweikart on the potential for a 2024 presidential matchup between The Rock and Kanye West.]

Guest piece by Larry Schweikart

As some of you know, more than a year ago I was asked—assuming Trump won reelection—who would be his successor in 2024. I guess I stunned the host when I answered “Kanye West.” And I then added, “I guess his opponent would have to be a similar type celebrity, say Dwayne The Rock Johnson.”

So far, Kanye has not inspired confidence in his political abilities. He started his independent run so late as to miss out on key states such as Florida and Texas; his team staggered into the Wisconsin offices to register 17 seconds too late and were denied; and DemoKKKrat legal, but dirty, tricks kept him off the Arizona ballot. In short, these are the traits of a pure amateur and an unserious candidate. That is not to say he can’t reform himself and build a machine for 2024, but it is to say that he looked like the early days of the New Orleans Saints when fans wore bags over their heads (instead of masks).

Kanye may have said he would be president, but he has a long way to go to make that happen, not the least of which would be to convince millions of conservatives he isn’t crazy and can stay on his meds. But the bigger story here is The Rock, because his endorsement of Joe Biden “could be” a step into the 2024 ring.

Just as I thought Kanye would be formidable for a host of reasons, so too is The Rock a candidate not to be dismissed if he chooses to make a serious run.

The shifts in the American political structure since 2008 are stunning to anyone really paying attention. This is about far more than Donald Trump and Barack Obama. What has occurred is nothing less than a transformation of the American electorate and how they view leaders.

Obama opened the door. He wasn’t a full blown celebrity like Trump—who had no political or military experience when he declared (making him the first in history to do so). Obama, however, had served both in state office and in the U.S. Senate . . . more or less. His lack of time actually present in the chambers was remarkable, and his penchant for not sponsoring any meaningful legislation fit right with his presidency. That is to say, he was a lazy pol. With a 2/3 majority of each house, all he and the Democrats did in two years was a seedy “stimulus” bill and Obamacare. What is even more remarkable is that while passing these two great white elephants, Obama managed to unelect over 1,200 national, state, and local Democrats. He almost single-handedly cleaned out the last remaining “moderate” pro-life Democrats in the House. Not that we shed any tears for any of this, only that given all the power, political capital, and good will he had, Obama probably did less in eight years than Calvin Coolidge did in five.

But you have to give him credit: Obama was probably the first true “celebrity” president. He learned how to use his “first black president” label to maximum extent for campaign purposes, so much so that Hillary Clinton—the anointed “first woman president”—fell by the wayside.

Donald Trump, however, took the celebrity element to a whole new level. Trump ran a campaign in which he scarcely needed to do ads. Virtually all his advertising was handled free by the media, even if the coverage was often critical. Trump could get 100 reporters to cover a rally; Hillary had to coax aging rock and rollers like Bruce Springsteen to do benefit concerts for her.

We have seen repeatedly in races for the U.S. Senate (Jim Renacci in the 2018 Ohio race, for example) or the House where unknown candidates spend most of their time and virtually all of their money getting that precious name recognition. We caught a glimpse of the power of celebrity in the 1994 House races where an NFL wide receiver (Steve Largent), a former star quarterback at the University of Oklahoma (J.C. Watts) and a former rock star (Sonny Bono) all won their races, as did a well-known and popular Phoenix-area disc jockey (J. D. Hayworth).  While clearly celebrity status only gets you part of the way, it is an important leg up on the competition.

The Trump model suggests that the approach to a candidacy may be changing. American demographics and education suggests that celebrity status will become more important than ever. While virtually anyone under 40 knows who Kanye or The Rock are, few can name the vice president of the United States or their senator. When it comes to getting out the vote, a celebrity will have powerful advantages.

Which brings me back to Kanye and The Rock. Celebrity is important, but it is not sufficient to win, especially at the presidential level. Donald Trump had learned more about business, finance, and trade in three decades as a builder than most of the members of Congress have in a lifetime of voting on pork projects. Both Kanye and The Rock are smart businessmen. Kanye has had a number of successful clothing ventures, and, like Trump, has had some failures, including a restaurant chain. (Restaurants seem to be one of the biggest sources of failures for athletes and celebrities. Think “Planet Hollywood.”) The Rock, on the other hand, has taken a wrestling career and merely become the #1 box office star in Hollywood—at least until it closed due to the China Virus. In part, he did that by keeping his mouth shut about politics, and thereby attracted an audience from both parties. Now, however, he has drawn a line.

The challenges moving forward are these: for Kanye, he must begin a long and dedicated effort to show that politics is not a hobby, but a God-directed purpose. Many of his supporters, especially those of the Christian community, desperately want him to succeed now. But he cannot ever again undertake such an amateurish, half-baked, lightweight “campaign” as what he launched in 2020. If he can right himself by, say, 2023 and has developed a strong track record of public appearances without a meltdown, sound policy proposals, and the ability to move among crowds of middle-aged white people who are repelled by rap music and still make a connection, then he has a future. Indeed, I could envision a certain Donald Trump endorsing him . . . if he pulls it together the way Trump, after 2012, pulled his political act together.

As for The Rock, he is formidable. Should he take politics seriously, he can likely get most of what he wants. He has a winning smile, a reputation for toughness in and out of the ring, a (so far) stable family history, a good personal story, and sex appeal. Conservatives should not discount him any more than liberals should blow off a reformed and dedicated Kanye. In a race between the two, it would absolutely be a tossup.

 

Larry Schweikart is the co-author with Michael Allen of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States, author of Reagan: the American President, and founder of the Wild World of History curriculum website for homeschoolers and educators with a full US and World History curriculum for grades 9-12 that includes teacher guides, student workbooks, maps/charts, tests, and videos accompanying every unit (www.wildworldofhistory.com).

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge, and deserves to become everyone’s go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

 

Open post

Larry Schweikart: How the 24-Hour News Cycle is Leading the Loss of the English Language

Guest Piece by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

Plenty of commentators have dealt with the lunacy that affects the English language today, from banning certain words as “racist,” “sexist,” or “something-ist.” Certainly that’s obvious to all. But there is another, more subtle change going on, even among the “friendly” or “reliable news pages.

It began when the 24-hour news cycle started to run out of, well, news. (Sidebar: How many of you want to throw a shoe at the television every time you hear that Fox News “BONG” breaking news alert—which was breaking news a week ago? And it doesn’t help that it’s oddly similar to the “Law and Order “BONG”). It took more than a decade for this development to settle in. At first, the networks filled the void with simply more talking heads, guests, and “analysts” telling you what the news was.

More recently however—I started really noticing it during the Mueller investigation—a host of non-news words began to creep into news stories. We began to see mush phrases such as

“Mueller mulling demand that Trump testify,” or “Mueller considering charging Don, Jr.” These kinds of hourly non-news stories utterly took over, for reporters weren’t supposed to know what was happening in the first place (the investigation after all—wink, wink, nudge, nudge—was to be secret. Since the Mueller team was leaking like the Titanic however, so-called journalists could not produce actual documents to prove anything. As it turned out, in fact, they had nothing to prove anything with. Instead, reporters reverted to the post-1980 favorite journalistic trick, the “unnamed source.” Realize it was not all that long ago that no reputable newspaper would ever run a piece with a single “anonymous source.” Indeed, according to a Chicago Tribune  reporter I interviewed during a foreword I wrote for Professor Jim Kuypers’ book, Partisan Journalism (2013), every major fact in a story was to be doubly sourced with public sources.

In case you didn’t notice, “mulling,” “considering,” “poised to,” “about to,” “prepared to,” “intends,” and other such mush words are utterly unprovable. “Yeah, Schweikart, Mueller intended to indict Don, Jr., but changed his mind.” Lacking any paper trail or actual documents, of course, such logic is irrefutable and every bit as meaningless or useless. After all, I intende to win both a Pulitzer and an Academy Award.

So consider a stroll through these headlines from July 26, 2020:

*(Politico) “Bass: Supporters will rally to Biden despite ‘94 Crime bill.”  (“will is future tense, and de facto can have no actual evidence. “The Dallas Cowboys will win the Super Bowl.” Um hum.)

*(www.thelibertydaily.com) “WATCH: Black man drops the mic on BLM movement.” (As interesting as this is, it is one man talking on a video on social media. He has no office, no official power to do anything.

*(Washington Free Beacon) “Illinois GOP Slams Press Corps for Failure to Press Democratic Governor on Corruption of Top Ally.” So the GOP said nasty things about the press? Maybe we should have a statue erected. Wait, those are being torn down . . . .

*(Twitchy) “I am appalled: Fromer Reagan Admin Official Mark Levin Calls out WaPo/Reagan Foundation story as ‘Publicity Stunt’. Once again, one person saying something about other people. Color me shocked.

*(Daily Political Newswire) “Eric Trump Mocks Joe Biden: ‘How Daring He is to Come Out of His Basement.’ One person mocks another. That’s hard hitting news fer ya!

*(BPR Business & Politics) “Lou Dobbs: ‘Mitch McConnell is doing a Paul Ryan. He’s about to lose the Senate.’” Again, Back to the Future.

*(New York Daily News, from October 28, 2017) “The Likely Targets in the Trump Camp of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Indictment” Hint: No one actually “in” the Trump camp was indicted. The closest was Gen. Michael Flynn, an Obama appointee.

*(Washington Post, November 14, 2017) “Sessions Considering Second Sepcial Counsel to Investigate Republican Concerns, Letter Shows.” Once again, people consider all sorts of things. I am “considering” moving to Bermuda, recording a drum solo album, and starting a major ant farm.

*(U.S. News July 22, 2020), “Democratic Group Looks to Close Trump-Biden Enthusiasm Gap.” Now, let that sink in, by the way. We have been told that Joe Biden has a massive lead in the polls. Five, ten, no make it fifteen points in Alabama!!! Why would the Democrats be worried about “closing a gap” that doesn’t exist? Unless, of course, it does and they know their guys is deader than a Thanksgiving Turkey. But the operative phrase is “looks to.” I look to lose 15 pounds and up my chess game.

*Finally, here is one via the New Hampshire Gazette via the AP from May 1, 2018: “Attorney: Mueller Team Weighing Subpoena for Trump.” I’m sure you “weigh” buying a new car vs. a trip to Vegas. This mush language is pure speculation about future events that might or might not happen.

All of these and many, many more (open Drudge or www.thelibertydaily.com for example) increasingly constitute “news,” because there is no news—at least, not nearly enough to fill up a 24/7 news cycle with thousands of internet “news” sites.  Eliminating “mush” language such as “considering,” “mulling,” “hoping to,” “planning,” ‘looking to,” “anticipating,” and so on is essential to the restoration of real news. Every story should be sourced with actual names, and two named sources required for every significant fact or claim. Finally, it wouldn’t hurt for editors to immediately bounce any story that isn’t describing something that has already happened instead of future events along a “12 Monkeys” timeline.

 

Larry Schweikart is the co-author with Michael Allen of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States and the author of Reagan: The American President. He is also the founder of the Wild World of History website with history curricula for teachers and homeschoolers (www.wildworldofhistory.com).

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Kanye 2020: A Win/Win/Win For Kanye, Trump, and the USA

Guest Piece From America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

In the fall of 2018 I was on a speaking trip to New Mexico. On Brandon Vogt’s radio show, I was asked who I thought would be the successor to Donald Trump, assuming he won reelection in 2020.  Vogt nearly fell out of the chair when I said “Kanye West.”

But my conclusion he would be (by 2024) the natural, perhaps ideal, candidate wasn’t just  an off-the-cuff capricious answer. I had given this a lot of thought. First, it can be argued that Barack Obama was the first “celebrity” president. True, he was a “traditional” politician, coming up through the ranks of the crooked Illinois system, then being whisked into the national spotlight with a speech. By the time he ran for president, however, it was all about the show. He was the “first black presidential candidate” (as the Hoax News media conveniently forgot Jesse Jackson and Alan Keyes, to name two). Obama and his team treated his candidacy as a celebrity event, dwarfing the hapless and corrupt John McCain on social media. Obama’s nomination acceptance speech was nothing but show-biz, with Greek columns and the “Voice of God” reverberation. Almost none of his younger and/or black supporters knew anything he stood for or anything he claimed to believe. He was a “young,” “hip,” black guy so he was the natural choice.

But as much as Obama—or Zero, as I nickname him for his utter lack of achievements—tried to be a celebrity president, he still had too much of the Chicago School in him. And I don’t mean the one renowned for Milton Friedman! In most ways Zero was a typical politician, except he didn’t work nearly as hard as most other presidents. Thank God.

Enter Donald John Trump in 2015. Here was a true non-politician celebrity. He was better known by many voters as the “guy on the Apprentice” than as the successful real-estate developer that he was. Certainly he carried his well-earned playboy reputation from the New York dating scene. He had help found a football league, and in a giant splash signed star running back Herschel Walker (now, by the way, a supporter of him as president). Trump was the first true celebrity president. With no political background whatsoever, he wasn’t corrupted by K Street the way most were, and he didn’t come with baggage of compromises as a senator, governor, or congressman. His very entrance down the Trump Tower elevator was show biz.

Trump has in many ways continued to govern like a non-politician celebrity. He has not changed his language or communication one iota, speaking in everyday common words and phrases rather than the stultified and phony “Washingtonese.” In pure Page Six style, he doesn’t hesitate to duke it out on Twitter with attackers. His flair for the “show” was evident in his campaign when Steve Bannon convinced him to roll out four of the Clinton women who had been maltreated by the Slickmeister. During his presidency, the Celebrate America military parade and events at the monuments was the essential Hollywood production.

The key to the new presidency is name recognition. American education has so destroyed reading, cognitive, and critical skills that traditional advertising just won’t work. Nor is there a willingness to explore platforms or issues. Rather, a name people recognize will be the single most important factor behind voter registration in deciding a vote. We saw this in 2018 in the Ohio Senate race, where Jim Renacci as an unknown spent his entire campaign trying to generate name recognition to compete with Democrat Sherrod Brown. Renacci lost by a whopping 6 points, despite a less-than-popular Mike DeWine winning the governor’s race by more than three points. That is largely a ten-point swing based solely on name recognition of a less than stellar Brown.

Based on these factors, I theorized that only someone with massive name recognition could even consider running for president in 2024, and that for the Republicans, that someone would have to be a solid Christian. Again, without the ability to filter through platforms, the view voters have of a candidate will be based on statements and attitudes they have seen before the campaign.

For that reason, Kanye was distinctly appealing. A rapper who has become a vocal and highly public born-again Christian, a businessman who has branched out into clothing lines and restaurants, and an entertainer who produces and performs large public Christian events, Kanye checked many of the boxes. Moreover, given Trump’s steady and, now, undeniable appeal into the black community (getting between 15% and 28% black approval in most polls for over four years), there is a new segment of blacks who perhaps are unwilling to commit to being a “Republican” but who would vote for Trump in much greater numbers than in 2016. Kanye would almost certainly appeal to a share of that segment. (Not all because many are more mainstream conservative in their attitudes, if not their previous voting history).

To me, Kanye was the only celebrity who could be called “conservative” in his public statements who would have such appeal. I not only expected him to plan to run—as per many of his comments prior to yesterday—but to plan to win. Kanye West will not be on the ballot to “make a point.” But then I was taken by surprise by Kanye’s announcement of running for president in 2020. Certainly he knows he won’t beat Trump. As an independent, certainly he knows he won’t even carry a single state.

So why is he running?

Upon reflection it makes perfect sense. Kanye, despite obvious strengths, has several significant weaknesses to be appealing in 2024. As mentioned, he lacks any political experience at all. Getting on ballots, mounting some sort of campaign based on issues, organizing a campaign team, learning the discipline of multiple public appearances a day—these are all things Kanye has never done before. While he has had his share of music critics, political critics are different in that they question your very right to exist as a challenger to a Democrat.

A 2020 run will prepare West in ways no apprenticeship for four years ever could. Moreover, by running now to get experience, he will (when he loses) have a natural lowered expectations that won’t be there in 2024—the real deal. My guess is (though he is mercurial) that he will keep his criticism of Trump quite muted and focus on “unity” and “Christian principles” so that in 2024 he can gain Trump’s endorsement for the Republican nomination.

IF he’s serious. I think he is. I believe he believes God has chosen him to run.

Many of the criticisms of Kanye from Republicans/conservatives are valid. Many can be addressed by a competent political campaign. Two of the biggest are his history as a rapper (whose marriage began with a pornographic web video) and his battle with mental illness. To the first concern, Trump has already flattened or reduced many of those barriers, while at the same time showing what a commitment to Christ can do to change a life. (Maybe not every aspect of life, but the ones that matter most). Kanye will have four years to demonstrate this.

The bigger issue, and one not to be taken lightly, is his history of bi-polar disorder. But again, two factors are working to minimize this.

First, we are continually learning about previously concealed medical or psychological deficiencies of previous presidents. Today, for example, most people know Abraham Lincoln was a manic depressive; that James Buchanan was likely a homosexual; that Grover Cleveland was absent from the office entirely during a secret cancer surgery; that John Kennedy was on amphetamines and had Addison’s (a fatal) disease. Bi-polar disorder, if medicated, would seem to be no worse than some of these afflictions.

Second, over the past 40 years mental illness of all types has become normalized. It is seen as near-bigotry to claim that someone is incapable of doing a job because he has Autism, depression, or any other number of mental health issues. Our normalization works in Kanye’s favor.

For 2020, though, many are asking, “What will be the impact?” How will a run by Kanye as an independent play in the race? The reaction from Democrats tells you all you need to know: they are terrified. Already Joe Biden (Demented Perv Biteme) was only pulling 74% black support in polls. That is a 50-year low, and Hillary lost with 88% black support. Biden was likely to see an erosion of actual black vote combined with black stay-at-home of somewhere between 15-17% this time around, which is a death sentence for a Democrat candidate.

Now with Kanye? I would not be surprised to see Biden’s share of the black vote fall to under 50%; to see Trump increase to 11-13% black vote (combining actual votes for Trump and stay-at-homes as a “half vote”); and see Kanye get 30% or more.

In short, for Trump, Kanye, and the USA this is a win/win/win.

 

Larry Schweikart is the co-author of the NYTimes #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States with Michael Allen; author of Reagan: The American President; and founder of the Wild World of History historical website with full high school history curriculum in US and World history (www.wildworldofhistory.com).

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Larry Schweikart: An Alternative Theory of the Riots

Guest Piece by Larry Schweikart

Some of you may know that I’m a historian of American banking and finance—that was my original research area and I probably wrote 4-5 books on the subject. What makes that all the more remarkable is that I never took a formal course in banking, finance, or even economics in my life. It was all “on the job training.”

So in a recent chat with a former co-author, Professor Charles Calormiris of Columbia University, on an article that came to be the most-cited piece I’ve ever written (“The Panic of 1857,” Journal of Economic History), our conversation naturally turned to banking. He began discussing research from his 2015 book “Fragile By Design” with Stephen Haber. He mentioned that something they found in that book now seemed all the clearer in light of recent riots.

In the 1990s through the early 2000s, there was a merger wave occurring among banks and financial firms. Many of you will remember your local, hometown banks began to disappear, replaced by J. P. Morgan Chase, Citibank, Wachovia, and Bank of America. It turns out that in the late 1990s, in order to gain congressional approval for these pending mergers, the banks needed to get certain legislators on their side. Legislators who were, shall we say, highly persuaded by minority communities. More to the point, the big banks needed leading black organizations and leaders to support their mergers.

Now, you ask, what possibly could be the benefit to minorities of having giants like Citibank or Chase take over more local banks? Under normal circumstances, nothing. But shakedown artists like Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton always know where to find a buck. In this case it was “community reinvestment.” Banks, they figured, could be “encouraged” to make massive loans in minority neighborhoods. Gee, someone might have to, er, “direct” such lending, wouldn’t they?

Absolutely. May I introduce NCRC, the National Community Reinvestment Coalition. Bank loans to the “minority community” were funneled through the NCRC—no doubt with the reverends taking a reasonable fee for their services—and in return, the black community wrote letters and gave testimony supporting the mergers. Just how much money are we talking about here? Two trillion dollars.

That money began to run out in 2015. The loans were usually either 10- or 15-year loan programs. “What’s the big deal? Just go back and shake them down again,” you say. Not so fast: the mergers are already complete. The banks don’t need the black community anymore. Just where were the bulk of these loans made? Oh, my friends, you know the answer to that. Calomiris and Haber found the usual suspects: Baltimore, St. Louis, Chicago—virtually anywhere there has been a riot recently.

It’s abundantly clear that one (perhaps only one, but perhaps the most important) of the factors that kept the streets quiet was the “walkin’ around money” spread by the banks seeking mergers. While the “Black Lives Matter” corporate coercion may produce relative dabs of cash, the leaders of these movements cannot hope to make up a $2 trillion shortfall. There may be much more to these riots than just “police brutality.” The gravy train has run out, and for now, even the ransom payments from corporate America won’t come close to replacing it.

Larry Schweikart is a historian, the co-author of A Patriot’s History of the United States with Michael Allen, author of Reagan: The American President, and is “America’s History Teacher” with a full US and World History curriculum for homeschoolers and other educators at www.wildworldofhistory.com.

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Larry Schweikart: Phones, Devices and Addiction – Managing, not Eliminating

Guest Piece by Larry Schweikart

I knew there was a problem when on Christmas Eve a family sat down next to us in church and before the choir even started singing, the man in the group pulled out his cell phone and began watching golf.

Yep. In church, on Christmas Eve.

Note to self: if you need to pull out your phone in church to do anything but read a Bible verse, you have a phone problem. If you spend more than two hours a day texting (this is the average texting time daily for teens!), you have a phone problem. If you miss meals and bathing because you are gaming on the internet, you are an addict. And if you or your kids are seeing psychologists for “anxiety” due to social media, you all have a phone and device problem.

The following is taken from my new book, All Thumbs: How Our Obsession with Phones and Devices is Damaging Our Children and Restructuring Our Lives, available only as a gift when you sign up for an annual VIP subscription at www.wildworldofhistory.com. While the field is still relatively new—remember, the “smart phone” only came out in 2007, the iPad in 2010—the vast, vast majority of research is suggesting that we as a society have phone and device problems. Simply put, the more you’re on the devices, the more likely you are to have anxiety, depression, and even suicidal thoughts; for girls, the behaviors also include self-harm and cutting. What I propose is certainly not prohibition, which would be impossible in today’s society in the first place, but as one would with medicine, alcohol or fast cars, management and control.

The cell phone spread to one-quarter of the U.S. population faster than any product in history except for its companion, the internet (13 years vs. 7 years). Merely finding out how much people are on phones is a challenge, because some studies double count, such as when a child is watching an iPad while simultaneously playing a video game on a hand-held device or texting. According to Pew, 92% of teens go online daily and half go online multiple times a day. Women have more extensive use of cell phones than men do, especially when it comes to text messaging; men are more likely to use a phone while driving. (More on that in a moment).

Here comes the scary stuff. Some 40% of teens hide their online behavior from their parents, including more than half of those 14-16 years old. Some kids—14%—hide their passwords from their parents and 10% regularly delete their browsing history. Yet parents think they know what’s going on: 70% of parents are unaware of their kids online/phone activities.

The devices are just the beginning. The websites and activities are the real issues here. Heavy Facebook/Instagram use has infected youth with massive levels of anxiety. One-third of eighth graders spent large amounts of time online just reading what other kids were saying about them. One pediatrician cited in the book who only five years ago saw one patient a week for anxiety now reports three to four a day, virtually all of them young people. Merely leaving a conversation without saying “goodbye” (called “ghosting”) can cause remarkable unease. In a single year, 2017-2018, emergency room visits for suicidal ideatoin and/or self-directed harm rose by more than 25%. And this phenomena is reported worldwide, not just in America. (I can’t even begin to get into “cyberbullying” and human trafficking via the internet in such a short column).

I found hundreds of studies on changes in the brain caused by phones and/or devices. If you want a quick source, look for anything by UCLA’s Dr. Gary Small, one of the first to study the stimulation of the brain by a computer (and remember, that’s what a smartphone is). Scans of brain activity on internet surfers, gamers, even girls looking at their Facebook posts, show significant effects on brain activity, few of them good. The reliable Journal of the American Medical Association says “children who have more screen time have lower structural integrity of white matter tracks . . . that support language and other emergent literacy skills.” Still other studies found that reading on pads or screens changes the very way we read and radically diminishes understanding and retention.

As for devices being addictive, the science shies away from flatly stating this. Usually the phrases are “shows strong correlation with” or “is strongly associated with.” The reason for such mush phrases is that controlling for phone/device use that would allow for absolute “causation” statements would require massive long-term “double-blind” studies that likely could not be conducted given the restrictions on kids that would be required.

Yet when I asked the authors of these studies, as well as pastors, psychologists, therapists and others whether they thought the devices were addictive, with only one exception, they all said “yes.” Steve Jobs was so convinced the smartphone was a bad thing he wouldn’t let his own kids have one. Research has shown that devices cause the “dopamine tickle,” a phrase that refers to a release of the pleasure transmitter dopamine into the brain. Typical video game dopamine release are at the level of 100%, or about the same as sex (eating chocolate is rated at 50%, cocaine, 350%). Game-related addictions have even cause a new disorder to be named: “Internet Addiction Disorder,” or IAD. But it’s not just games: it turns out that releasing information on the web (“Do you know who I saw her with??”) also causes the “dopamine tickle.” Wait! It gets better (worse?): 55% of technicians monitoring heart bypass machines reported talking on their cell phones during surgery!

For our kids, it may be worse. Some 46% of all Americans said they could not live without their cell phones. A 2020 very large study of 21,000 high schoolers found the three most mentioned “feelings” they experienced were “tired, stressed, and bored,” with tired the most popular response. Why? Would it be because studies link phones to sleep deprivation? And keep in mind that a mere two hours a day on devices reduces language and thinking skills. At seven hours a day, research shows clear premature thinning of the cortex, a development that usually happns much later in a person’s aging process. How much time total do kids actually spend on phones and/or devices? Dr. Eimitri Christakis puts the number at 4.5 hours a day just on phones. Even kids admit they are spending too much time on phones, with 60% saying it is a “major problem’ in their life.

There is much more, including the dangers of texting and driving. But this is enough for now for you to ask, “So what do we do?

Here are three quick suggestions:

1) The first thing you and your kids need to do is to have an honest assessment of how much time you and they are on devices. This is time you are not interacting with another live person. So, carve out specific people time. That means, especially for parents with kids, car time and dinner time. No phones at dinner. No phones for anyone in the car unless it’s a GPS for around town. For longer trips, have the first half-hour out and the last half-hour back as no phone time.

2) Never allow children to sleep with their phones. If they (or you!) use a phone for an alarm, get a clock. Phones interrupt sleep in many different ways, as discussed in the book.

3) Most important, as you develop non-phone time and phone rules, parents remember it’s your phone. You pay for it, and therefore you get to set the rules.

These and many other suggestions, along with many sources and references for help, are in All Thumbs, and I’ve only scratched the surface. Start today learning to live better with your phone or your device!

Larry Schweikart is the co-author of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States with Michael Allen and the author of Reagan: The American President. He also has an instructional history site, www.wildworldofhistory.com where this and full history curricula can be purchased.

Open post

Larry Schweikart: How Trump has Re-Shaped the American Electorate

[Note: Larry Schweikart, America’s History Teacher and author/co-author of several best selling books, is a frequent contributor here at The Campaign Update. This morning he posted a terrific thread on Twitter containing an array of insights on current events and the 2020 election dynamics, which I am reproducing here with his permisssion.]

3) How do you know Trump has largely won on both issues? They ain’t in the news.

4) When was the last time you heard about the Wall? DemoKKKrats know they cannot stop it now. They’ve given up even trying. Trump pulled off a master move in funding it through the Pentagon.

5) On trade/outsourcing, Trump proved that, yes, he did have a magic wand and yes some of the jobs did come back & were coming back steadily before China retaliated with the China Virus.

6) But DemoKKKrats know in any kind of “normal” economy, MANY of those jobs will come back.

7) I am convinced this is partly the reason for the heightened Kushner attacks last week. DemoKKKrats are still (unsuccessfully) trying to drive a wedge between the jobs/trade side of MAGA and the immigration side.

8) BTW, where is Menopausal Ann [Coulter] on this? Where is DACA?

9) DemoKKKrats have totally dropped DACA cuz they lost.

10) What is the significance of the illegal slowdown? Of the DACA loss?

11) It has spurred the DemoKKKrats even more to try to find other voters to replace them.

12) DemoKKKrats’ black support is slowly eroding.

13) Just like whites, you will see a MAGA black side (most still will out of safety concerns not say this openly) and a (yes, much larger) BLM side.

14) On the MAGA side will be business owners, middle and aspiring middle class blacks, & blue collar workers.

15) Not surprisingly, while the percentages will be different, the black community will (finally) come to resemble the white community in that you’ll have snowflake BLM/college educated blacks robotized by “higher ed” & you’ll have “practical blacks” who’ve seen the Ds do nothing.

16) There is plenty of poll support for this second group of MAGA blacks to be anywhere from 15-25% of the black electorate, but there is good reason to think there is another skeptical layer that will always just stay home rather than keep voting for liars.

17) As @helloitsthao  [Thao Nguyen] points out, this is creating a “donut” where elements of inner cities & outer ring/rural whites vote MAGA and the inner suburb snowflake Karens vote Whackadoodle Lib.

18) However, in the bigger picture, Trump has totally destroyed the DemoKKKrats’ next 50 years of voter base with sharply curtailing illegals & by attracting “practical black” votes.

19) The DemoKKKrats had to go somewhere.

20) Enter the Snowflake Karens.

21) The dual edged sword of China Virus fear porn & the shaming-on-steroids BLM hate movement have thus far succeeded with that inner ring. Most urban-dwelling college educated now hate Trump (rural do not). This is largely out of fear-shaming by SJWs now joined by the corporates.

22) Oh, here are two Larry Schweikart prophecies: First, the NFL WILL sport some sort of BLM logo on helmets & uniforms this fall. (Your response: “Well, I’ll just watch college football.”) Not so fast. VERY SOON, maybe this year you’ll also see the colleges go full BLM in their sports.

22) contd. Second, the 15% movement, where bidnesses are shamed into saying they will purchase/use suppliers who are black owned by the rate of 15%? Soon BLM will demand 30%. Then 60%. Then 100%. NO. NUMBER. WILL. EVER. BE. ENOUGH.

23) Allow me to quote from “A Patriot’s History of the United States” by Schweikart and Michael Allen: [1960’s radical] Jerry Rubin explainedSatisfy our demands & we go twelve more… All we want from these meetings are demands that are never ‘reasonable’. When the demands reached the point that no rational university administrator [OR, I WOULD ADD TODAY, CITY OR BUSINESS LEADER] or public official could possibly comply with them,’ Rubin noted, “Then we scream, righteously angry . . . . Goals are irrelevant. The tactics, the actions are critical.”

24) Of course, Rubin wasn’t entirely honest. No leftists are. He meant that short-term goals were irrelevant, but the destabilization of society as a long-term objective was entirely relevant.

25) The last people to figure this out are liberals. That’s why in communist society they are the first ones shot and imprisoned. They are sheep, baffled by the fact that the “movement” has turned on them. Conservatives & advocates of freedom fought, ran, or hid for far longer.

26) In conclusion, the NFL, the NBA, the City of Seattle, the City of New York, the City of Chicago et al. are all on borrowed time. There will be “twelve more demands.”

[End]

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Larry Schweikart: Antifa’s Deadly Beauty

Guest Piece by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

About six months ago I suddenly realized that we had not heard from the fascist so-called “antifa” in a long time. I actually thought perhaps we had broken them, that their ineffectiveness previously had caused the movement to dissipate.

Boy was I wrong. Something quite different had been occurring. The fascist “antifa” had been mobilizing and sitting in their little commie-type sleeper cells awaiting a call for activation. No one, including George Soros—who either personally or through channels sent the “go” order—knew exactly what that instigating event would be. The point is, the fascist “antifa” was ready. They were trained to be in the streets within 24 hours, in multiple cities, en masse. There was a deadly beauty to the organizational skill involved in the “call up” of these quasi-military forces. And no doubt, more than a few of the snowflakes were sufficiently intimidated by the China Virus and obediently took to their masks as they sheltered in place.

But after a week, it is clear that there are two basic groups involved in these riots. The first are blacks who took the opportunity of George Floyd’s death to protest, loot, and burn. No one on the right—not one single person so far that I’ve seen—has called Floyd’s death anything less than a murder. No one has suggested anything be done with the killer cop than perpetual jail. (Proving premeditation would be nearly impossible here and hence there will not be a death penalty on the table, no matter what some of the whackos call for. In other words, the right is united that this was a case of police brutality.

In the case of Minneapolis, however, it appears that this policeman in particular has been given repeated passes on his over-the-top violence. And in 2017, Mohamed Noor, a Somalil cop in Minneapolis, shot and killed Justine Damond. Naturally, instead of endorsing the jail sentence for a murderer, the civil rights crowd complained Noor was treated differently from other officers who killed civilians. Noor shot the unarmed Damond as she approached the car. Minneapolis, in other words, has had a track record of excessive police force. Various photos show as many as three police on top of George Floyd with Derek Chauvin kneeling on the handcuffed Floyd’s neck as he lay face down. Whether Chauvin actually choked off Floyd’s air supply or merely contributed to his heart giving out will be a matter of debate by medical specialists.

What’s equally troubling is that one other person was filming the whole event; at least two other officers were helping Chauvin; and another officer was standing nearby. None intervened to simply place the man in the back of the police car. Such an incident should provoke a massive reaction, including a complete overhaul of the Minneapolis Police Department. What it should not have provoked were mobs burning and looting stores and taking over a MPD precinct station. In all cases, both the MPD and the mayor—and the snowflake governor who essentially encouraged the looters—the police should have immediately moved in to stop illegal activity.

But here comes the kicker: when they started arresting people, the police found out that some 40% of them were out-of-towners. Who could that possibly be? Fascist so-called antifa mobs. Video surfaced today of a white antifa goon instructing “protestors” where to go and what targets to hit.

We won’t even get into the reality that many of these (mostly) black-owned businesses that were looted or burned were still under the snowflake governor’s lockdown policies and were dying on the vine.

Make no mistake: this was a Soros-backed, fascist so-called “antifa”-led series of national mob riots with no connection whatsoever to George Floyd. Most of the mob rioters probably thought Floyd’s first name was “Pink.” This was a well-planned, orchestrated evil designed in the pit of George Soros’s hell to destabilize not just the USA, but also England and Canada (where “protest” of more Pink Floyd fans joined the rioting. Like some snakes, this operation was beautiful in its design and deadly in its venom.

Today President Donald Trump announced he would officially designate the fascist so-called “antifa” group a terrorist organization. Among other things, that means that not only the Department of Justice will now (we hope) prosecute it, but the Treasury and IRS can now become involved in tracking the terrorists’ finances that almost certainly lead to George Soros. This is a big deal. But . . .

How big depends entirely on the vigor with which Attorney General William Barr actually follows through. More important, it will require a significant buy-in from the leftist-leaning bureaucracies in the FBI, Treasury, and IRS. Whether an actual prosecution of the fascists called antifa is possible remains to be seen. Ironically, however, Trump’s designation of antifa as a terrorist organization means that so far Barack Obama has been largely responsible for the creation of two terrorist groups, ISIS and antifa. Now, if we can only get Black Lives Matter to be so designated . . . .

Larry Schweikart is the co-author of the #1 New York Times bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States with Michael Allen and the author of Reagan: The American President. His website is the Wild World of History www.wildworldofhistory.com

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Larry Schweikart: Democrats Push the Panic-Porn Button

Guest Contribution by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

As the Democrat governors lose the narrative of the China Virus—and also lose control of their states, they have ratcheted up the panic-porn to new levels. Hoax News reporters harangue President Donald Trump about not wearing a mask, then about taking hydroxychloroquine, then about whether he would shut down the country if the China Virus numbers suddenly rise again.

His answers? “No, I won’t wear a mask,” “I’ve been taking hydroxycholoroquine for two weeks,” and “No, I won’t shut the country down again.”

Bravo.

It’s clear none of this has anything whatsoever to do with a flu and everything to do with damaging the U.S. economy enough to keep Trump from getting massively reelected. After all, they did it once before . . . sort of. In early October, 2016, as Joel Pollak and I revealed in our book How Trump Won, the Trump team was circulating internal polls that were shockingly good for The Donald. How good? They had him within the margin of error in Illinois, Rhode Island, and Oregon. They had him even in Minnesota (which, as it turned out, was the case).

I am convinced that Hillary Clinton’s team was reading the same tea leaves, and had to do anything to stop the momentum. I believe that is why they rolled out the “Access Hollywood” tape so early. It did have a damaging, but quite temporary, effect on the Trump team. But by election day, the impact had faded, and while Trump did not carry Oregon, or Rhode Island, or Illinois, he did shock the pundits by winning perennial teaser states for the GOP like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, and came reasonably close to winning Virginia and within a hair of winning New Hampshire. This suggests that early internal polling had some merit.

The point is, “Access Hollywood” was a last-minute, desperate brake on Trump’s momentum. While the Democrats didn’t introduce the China Virus to the U.S.—China did—they reveled in an opportunity to again put a brake on Trumpmentum. One can look at polls from the same Hoax Pollsters who gave us a Hillary landslide in 2016, or who missed Wisconsin by an average of six points, or who missed the Ron DeSantis/Rick Scott/Josh Hawley/Mike Braun elections in 2018. Those same Hoax Pollsters say that Joe (I’m hidin’) Biden, who hasn’t appeared in public at a live event in nearly two months, is somehow leading President Trump.

If you buy that, then you likely have the Las Vegas Raiders winning the Super Bowl this year, too.
What the draconian lockdowns by the blue-state governors, particularly Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, J. B. Pritzker in Illinois, Gavin Newsom in California, and Andrew Cuomo in New York have done is to finally . . . finally . . . chip away at the remaining Democrat base. Already—and the Democrats, deep in their evil hovels of voter analysis know this—Trump has been eroding the black vote and has been actually building quite a bit of Hispanic support. Most polls put Trump’s black approval at between 16% and 22%.

Blacks, and even black conservatives, are quick to insist that Trump won’t get that much of the actual black vote, and they are right. He doesn’t need to. He’ll get between 12-13% actual vote, but add to that another 3-5% of black voters who will stay home. That is a death sentence for the Democrats. That alone would put Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, and North Carolina in Trump’s column. But when you add that to his up to 47% (in some polls) Hispanic support, and combine that with the outrage in the suburban areas of Virginia, Minnesota, Colorado, and other states enduring a lockdown, Trump’s electoral college numbers are poised to soar.

These last two weeks we had two good tests of the public mood on the lockdowns. A Republican held the WI7 seat largely on the basis of winning mail-in ballots, and not just absentees! In California, Mike Garcia flipped the seat previously held by Katie (The Fuller Brush Girl) Hill, who had resigned. Garcia won by nine, and most surprising of all, continued to break even in the days after the election when Democrat “vote harvesting” often produces surprises. Then, in Staughton, Virginia, Republicans flipped three out of three city assembly seats in a district that went for Barack Obama twice. The issues? Guns and the lockdown.

When you add to this the fact that Governor Cuomo literally sentenced old people to death by sending China-Virus-infected old people back to nursing homes, I think you’ll start to see a serious boil here by election time. The last hope was to somehow perpetuate the panic through the virtue-signaling wearing of masks (of dubious effectiveness, as admitted even by St. Fauci). It ain’t happenin’. The red states that opened, such as Georgia and Florida, have lower rates of the China Virus now. Remarkable what sunlight and herd immunity will do to the flu.

As for Trump? He will be the beneficiary of not only creating one, but two great economies by election time, while simultaneously overcoming the China Virus. The Democrats couldn’t help themselves. They pushed the Panic Porn Button too soon.

Larry Schweikart is the co-author with Michael Allen of A Patriot’s History of the United States, with Joel Pollak of How Trump Won, and the sole author of Reagan: The American President. His history website features full history curricula for homeschoolers and educators, grades 8-12 at www.wildworldofhistory.com.

 

 

 

 

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

The China Virus’s Side Effects: The 2020 Election

The China Virus’s Side Effects: The 2020 Election

Guest Contribution by Larry Schweikart, America’s History Teacher

In September 2019 I wrote that the suicide of the House was complete when it began pursuing a meaningless and infantile impeachment of President Donald Trump. This suicide was, I argued, largely due to the fact that throughout the Bush and Obama years, the House had yielded much of its constitutional authority over it’s greatest stipulated power: the budget. Once that was gone, its very purpose for existing was called into question. When Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat hatchet gang spent the entire first year in power in a game of “get Trump”—while Trump continued to issue executive order after executive order and/or make end runs through the court system he had largely packed by then, the House’s historic role was pretty much finished.

I argued that the wave of Republicans resigning or not running for reelection was a sign that even though they may have held out hopes of winning, it would be meaningless. The House could no longer really do much. It had become the American version of the House of Lords, while, inversely, the US Senate—with its confirmation powers—had become the true place where “it’s happening.”

Now we approach the 2020 elections in the midst of the Corona Virus, better known as the China Virus or Wuhan Flu. Even in the wake of the Democrat House meltdown, not a great deal has changed. Republicans can point to evening the generic ballot, and even leading in some surveys—which in normal times would mean a landslide House victory. And there have been solid candidates recruited for many of the races that flipped in 2018, including both TX seats, OK5, the NJ seats, and the NM seat. Collectively (by my math) these races with candidates who stand to win amount to at most 10 seats.

That would leave the Republicans about eight short of flipping. One piece of extremely encouraging news comes from the CA38 race, where a Republican will win and flip that California state house seat, thanks to that state’s “jungle primary” where the top two vote getters run off in the general. In this case, the Democrats bungled it and allowed the GOP to place 1-2. In November, up to five of the CA US House seats look flippable.

But there are broad headwinds against the GOP. The lesser of these, fundraising, is lagging because of two factors. First is the fact that in most races, candidates aren’t decided yet, and fundraising for a primary is usually harder than against a Democrat. But the second involves the China Virus.

By pushing back so many primaries—as occurred in Virginia this week—Republicans won’t get those candidates until still later in 2020. But the China Virus also slams fundraising. Who can give to House candidates if you are unemployed, concerned about the mortgage, etc.?

On a broader scale, however, the Republicans have a bigger problem. How do you campaign against a House that has done nothing? In “normal” times, that might be an easy task. But in impeachment/China Virus times? It becomes difficult for candidates to say what they would have done differently. Of course, not vote for impeachment. But what else? Since there have been no major issues on which to take a stand (as contrasted with 1994 when the House Bank, term limits, and bringing items to the floor for a vote were key voting issues), it becomes almost impossible to define a candidate differently than the incumbent. Will “I wouldn’t have voted to impeach President Trump” be enough? Probably not.

How do you campaign for a seat that has been rendered nearly meaningless by Pelosi? This is why dog-catcher races are won with totals in the hundreds—because the position is in the overall big picture so insignificant that only family and friends vote. Over a one and a half year period—again, working from a foundation already handed her by the Republicans in the Obama era—Pelosi has made voting for a House seat less meaningful than ever.

There is a little light at the end of the tunnel. Most Democrat incumbents in the “flipped” seats are underwater in their polling. In the Senate races, John James in Michigan is polling better than his opponent. But all incumbents will fare better in this shutdown as their opponents are pre-empted from campaigning at all. For Martha McSally and Cory Gardner, that is good news. The GOP should keep the Senate, and it is entirely possible now that the balance will not change even if both McSally and Gardner lose due to flips from Alabama and Michigan.

It is, ironically, also good news for President Trump. Joe Biden is in lockup—although it is unclear if he is hurt by being in front of people or not—and his approval ratings in handling the crisis are, so far, extremely good. Last week, he went up in every major poll ranging from a whopping 54% approval in the best to 46% in the worse, for an average of over 47%. (He was elected in 2016 with a 46% approval.) Campaigning against Trump’s handling of the China Virus policies is tricky, and Biden already has seen how difficult it is to claim Trump should be doing something different.

Which brings us to “a” likely scenario for 2020: Trump will win convincingly, if not with an outright landslide (probably in the neighborhood of 320-340 electoral votes, adding Minnesota and New Hampshire to his 2016 list). The Republicans will hold the Senate at close to the present margin. But it is entirely possible the Democrats will narrowly hang on to the House. If that happens, they will be incapable of restraining themselves from once again seeking to impeach President Trump on baseless charges. It’s all they know. And they cannot present any true legislation that would in any way advance the nation’s interests because that would rebound to Trump.

Look for two more years of stonewalling from a House seeing its influence and power eroding; more confirmations from the Senate for Trump judges (because, without the House, that’s all the Senate will have); and Trump continuing to work through executive orders and the judiciary with a split House/Senate incapable of stopping him. It is absolutely not what our Founders wanted. But when one branch of government completely abdicates its role, it’s what we get.

Larry Schweikart is a retired professor of history, the co-author with Michael Allen of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States, and the president of the Wild World of History, a history curriculum site for homeschoolers and educators (www.wildworldofhistory.com)

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Why Kanye West will be Trump’s Successor in the White House

Guest piece from America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

I know. I get outright laughter when I say this (which I first did in 2018 on Brandon Voght’s radio show in New Mexico when asked who would be the GOP nominee in 2024 assuming Trump wins in 2020. (First, there is no doubt in my mind that Trump not only will win in 2020, but will do so even far more convincingly than in 2016—perhaps between 320 and 340 electoral votes and win the popular vote. But it could be even better for Trump depending on who the Democrat nominee is).

Anyway, back to Kanye. “This is ridiculous. A rapper in the White House?” No, he likely would not have the electoral expertise of a Ronald Reagan, who had eight years as California governor to keep him from being “just an actor.” Nor does he have Trump’s decades of experience in physical construction, though he began his career as a music producer for Roc-a-Fella Records by producing stars such as Jay-Z, Ludacris, and Alicia Keys. But he also has been a fashion designer with his “Yeezy” collaboration with Adidas, founded the creative content company DONDA, founded the record label (in 2004) called GOOD Music (“Getting Out Our Dreams”).

In some ways, West has surpassed Reagan’s “second life” achievements. As an actor, Reagan never achieved greatness—in large part because he never really wanted to. As I showed in my recent biography, Reagan: The American President, he never put in the time of “method actors,” or immersed himself in a role to the extent that it changed his body (the way Matthew McConaughey or Christian Bale have), not to mention changing his mental stability as Heath Ledger did with the “Joker” role. Reagan said of himself, “You know that guy that grabs the phone and says, ‘Hold on! Have I got a story for you?’ That’s me!” He would not play a villain, finally agreeing to in his very last film, The Killers.

While Trump’s achievements dot the skyline, West’s dot the annals of pop culture. He has sold over 100 million records, won 21 Grammy Awards, and had three albums make the Rolling Stone top 500 albums of all time list. Twice Time magazine has called him one of the 500 most influential people in the world.

Probably most people know about West more through his controversies than through his music. In 2016 he was convinced to admit himself into UCLA Medical Center for depression, paranoia, and other undiagnosed issues. Many think he is bipolar, which he confirmed on David Letterman’s show in 2019. One thing is certain: anyone looking at photos of Kanye prior to his conversion to Christianity and since can only notice the change from angry and isolated to a man  happy and full of life.

Daniel Boorstein, over 50 years ago, predicted that the future of American politics would be celebrity. In a study of the modern age, Olivia Laing noted that Andy Warhol perhaps embodied the shift from sexual desire as the most animating force to the desire for attention. “Keeping up With the Kardashians” was merely the inevitable outcome of that movement.

In politics, name recognition is no small thing. Take the 2018 Senate elections in Ohio or Michigan, for example: both Republican challengers (Jim Renaicci and John James) spent the vast bulk of their campaign trying to raise name awareness. Yesterday, Tom Steyer dropped out of the Democrat primary campaign because, despite spending over $200 million (!) in ads, the first word most people uttered when they watched a Steyer ad was “Who?” The collapse of political awareness (or historical knowledge for that matter) among modern young people exacerbates this. Any Jesse Watters’ man-on-the-street video in which he questions college students shows that the vast majority of them can’t name a single Supreme Court Justice, say what job Nancy Pelosi holds, or identify Mike Pence. But you can get they know Kanye. Does anyone seriously wish to argue that this situation will improve in the next 4.5 years? By 2024, celebrity will be a requirement for public office if only because it is the only way to get uneducated/ill-informed voters to the polls.

Reagan found that his celebrity Hollywood status still worked against him in 1980, making it hard for some people to take “an actor” seriously. But in the Greta Thunberg age, where children are viewed as deep-thinking saviors of the world, Reagan’s concern no longer exists. Quite the contrary, it is now a requirement.

Barack Obama dabbled at being the first celebrity president, leveraging a single national speech into the presidency (along with the trademarked “first African-American president”). But he never quite pulled it off. Obama did not dare put himself in the midst of too many celebrities who were bigger than he was, otherwise he would vanish. But Trump?

Trump thrives on celebrity. It’s his oxygen. Who needs press conferences when Trump can do his own? Need a photo-op? Just bring up the most beautiful first lady in history. If Trump needs to get his message out, it’s only a Tweet away. And if it’s a bigger message than Twitter can handle, he schedules an American pride celebration on the Mall complete with tanks and the Blue Angels. He is the celebrity president.

This will be the norm from now on, and explains in part why existing Democrat candidates are having difficulty getting traction against him (besides the fact that their policies are flat-out insane). Anyone who thinks Mike Pence, as good as he is, can capture this lightning in a bottle is sorely mistaken.

Oh, and did I mention Kanye said he would be president? He told the British tabloid the Sun he would be president, and later said “when I am president.” West has shown he can accomplish incredible things. His rehab and conversion to Christianity is a major step, as suddenly he has gone from the object of evangelicals’ ire to a redemption story like none other.

His ascent as a major GOP candidate (which seems his likely party of choice, given his friendship with President Trump) means that the only Democrat who could possibly defeat him would have to similarly be a celebrity. Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson hasn’t announced his political leanings, but he is one of the few who could match Kanye’s omnipresence in culture.  As strange as it may sound in 2020, the phrase “President West” may not seem nearly as odd in four years.

 

Larry Schweikart is the author of Reagan: The American President and the co-author of the New York Times #1 bestseller, A Patriot’s History of the United States. He currently runs the Wild World of History (www.wildworldofhistory.com) history curriculum business.

 

 

 

 

 

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Trump’s New Hampshire Rally Shows Why His Opponents Are So Desperate

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

You may have been wondering why your support for Donald Trump has suddenly resulted in your being labeled a “white supremacist.” Doesn’t matter whether you happen to actually be white, or whether you are latino, black, male, female or one of the other mythical genders now being invented by the political left, if you support the sitting President of the United States of America, that means you will be labeled a “white supremacist” by the Democrats and our fake news media.

Don’t laugh at the notion that President Trump actually has Latino and Black supporters: A just-released Zogby poll shows the President’s support among those two demographics rising substantially in response to the ongoing “white supremacist” campaign. According to Zogby, 28% of registered Black voters and fully 49% of registered Latinos approve of Trump’s job performance.

Which of course is one more reason why the Democrats and their media toadies are frantically attempting to marginalize you as being some sort of inhuman monster. If the President were to win just 30% of Latino votes (he won 28% in 2016) and maybe 12% of the Black vote (he got 6% in 2016) next year, he will be re-elected in a massive landslide, and sweep in new, larger majorities in both houses of congress with him.

The Democrats cannot countenance that, so they believe they can counteract that growing public approval rating by labeling the President as a hater of Latinos and Blacks. But because ordinary Americans are not nearly as stupid as Democrats invariably assume them to be, this transparently cynical strategy is backfiring.

If you can remember all the way back to last week, Democrat members of congress and presidential candidates like Joaquin Castro (a guy who doxxes his own supporters), the pathetic Irish Bob O’Rourke, and Spartacus Booker rushed to argue that because Trump was a racist bigot who literally caused the mass shootings in Dayton and El Paso, why, that means he simply must cancel all future rallies like the one we saw Thursday night in New Hampshire.

Why do you suppose they would make such an outlandishly laughable leap of logic? Because they know just how effective those rallies happen to be, and understand how critical they are to the President’s chances of being re-elected. Other than his Twitter feed, those rallies are the only means President Trump has of cutting through the fake news media fog and talking directly to the American people.

But, you might be thinking, how does that work, since the only media outlet that televises the rallies is Fox News? New York Times best-selling author Larry Schweikart answered that question in his book – co-authored with Joel Pollak – “How Trump Won”:

[I’m not active on Twitter anymore, but if you are and you aren’t following @LarrySchweikart and @joelpollak, you are missing out.]

Note what Larry says in that tweet: “the main value of the rallies was NOT Trump speaking to those in attendance but the local news coverage into large regions that allowed Trump to get his message out in short bursts without national anti-Trump ‘panels’ commenting.”  Bingo.

The President doesn’t really care that CNN and MSNBC don’t televise his rallies, in part because their audiences are rapidly shrinking since their “muh Russia collusion” narrative crashed up on the shoals of the Mueller Report, and in part because anyone watching those two fake news networks is already completely brainwashed anyway.

What Trump cares about is that he spoke to 12,000 New Hampshire voters Thursday night, and anyone who draws a crowd of 12,000 in New Hampshire is going to get gobs of coverage on every local newscast in the state. That coverage is going to largely consist of out-takes of key messages from his speech. That is an incredibly valuable means of influencing hundreds of thousands more potential voters.

Note also that, while Schweikart and Pollak say the local coverage is the “main value” of the rallies, they do not say that the attendance at the rallies is not important as well. Quite the contrary: The President spoke to more individual voters in that arena last night than any of the Democrat candidates have spoken to through the course of their entire campaigns at this point.

Even more valuable, every one of those 12,000 potential voters left that arena pumped up and ready to go try to convince their friends and family to vote for Trump. They’ll all be talking for weeks and months about the excitement he generated in that arena.

So, you wonder why you are suddenly being labeled a “white supremacist,” an inhuman monster who must be shunned and punished? It’s because if you are just a regular patriotic American who loves your country and wants it to be great again, then the Democrats have literally no hope of defeating you and President Trump in 2020.

It really is that simple.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time. 

Scroll to top