Category Archives: Politics

Points to Ponder on the Constitution

Posted on by
1

Some points to ponder on the Constitution:

1. When the Constitution called the federal government into existence, the federal government was not vested with omnipotent powers. Instead, the federal government’s powers were limited to those that were enumerated in the Constitution, which were few.

2. The Constitution called into existence a limited-government republic, not a national-security state. If the Constitution had proposed calling into existence a national-security state, there is no possibility that our American ancestors would have approved it. In that case, the United States would have continued operating under the Articles of Confederation, a type of governmental system in which the federal government’s powers were so few and weak that it didn’t even have the power to tax.

3. Under America’s limited-government republic, there was a small, basic army. For more than a century, there was no Pentagon, military-industrial complex, foreign military bases, CIA, NSA, or FBI. Our American ancestors were fiercely opposed to “standing armies,” which was their term for a national-security state. See “The Dangers of a Standing Army.”

4. The Bill of Rights did not grant any rights to the people. Instead, it expressly prohibited the federal government from infringing or destroying the preexisting natural and God-given rights and liberties of the people. The federal government was prohibited from destroying freedom of speech, freedom of the press, religious liberty, freedom of association, and the right to keep and bear arms. It was prohibited from depriving people of life, liberty, and property without due process of law or trial by jury. It was prohibited from inflicting on people cruel and unusual punishments, indefinite detention, and torture. 

5. The reason for the limited powers in the Constitution and the restrictions on powers in the Bill of Rights was that our American ancestors knew that federal officials would exercise dictatorial and tyrannical powers if they were not expressly prohibited from doing so. Our American ancestors believed that the greatest threat to their rights, liberties, and well-being lay with their very own government, not with some foreign government. 

6. After World War II, the federal government was converted to a national-security state. The national-security establishment — that is, the Pentagon, CIA, and NSA — was called into existence. For the first time in U.S. history, federal officials were vested with omnipotent, non-reviewable, dark-side powers — the same types of powers wielded and exercised by communist and other totalitarian regimes. These included assassination, kidnapping, torture, indefinite detention, mass secret surveillance, coups, state secrets, military tribunals, invasions, wars of aggression, foreign interventionism, sanctions, embargoes, alliances with dictatorial regimes, and regime-change operations. Over time, the military-intelligence establishment established a veritable empire of military bases, both foreign and domestic. Budgets for the new national-security branch of the federal government began soaring and ultimately threatening America with national bankruptcy. It was all done without even the semblance of a constitutional amendment.

7. Neither Russia nor any other foreign regime has destroyed the rights, liberties, and well-being of the American people. Instead, it has been the Pentagon, the military-industrial-congressional complex, the CIA, and the NSA that have destroyed the rights, liberties, and well-being of the American people. There is no way that people can be considered free who live under a government that wields the omnipotent, dictatorial, dark-side powers of assassination, torture, kidnapping, indefinite detention, mass secret surveillance, foreign interventionism, coups, alliances with dictatorial regimes, regime-change operations, entangling alliances, sanctions, and embargoes.

8. If Americans are to regain a free, prosperous, harmonious, moral, normal, and peaceful society, their focus must not be on Russia, China, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, terrorism, communism, Islam, or any other supposed threat. Their focus must necessarily be on the entity that has destroyed their rights, liberties, and well-being, and that is currently pushing them closer to nuclear devastation, not to mention national bankruptcy — the national-security state that was unconstitutionally and illegally brought into existence to fight its Cold War racket. As I point out in the concluding chapter of my new book An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story (buy it here), the key to restoring a free, peaceful, harmonious, moral, normally functioning, and prosperous society is the restoration of America’s founding system of a limited-government republic. 

Jacob G. Hornberger, Future of Freedon Foundation

The Economics of America’s Probable Breakup

Posted on by
Reply

Brad Polumbo on Twitter: “The national debt is a ticking time bomb. Interest on the $30T debt recalculates as interest rates go up. Interest rates have been historically low for decades now. But they’ll return to 5-10 percent–then we’ll have TRILLIONS in new taxes just to cover annual interest payments.”

Another reason the U.S. will break up. The military is already being decimated. The currency will be eaten up by inflation. So what benefit does the federal government bring to states like Florida, Texas and others who wish to be free and prosperous? No currency, no military–so why the hell put up with President Kamala or President Buttigieg, or whatever follows the failing Biden? Increasingly, the U.S. federal government is a liability. It’s sad and will be hard for us to accept. But it will happen, and has already started. Russia has responded accordingly, and China will follow by invading Taiwan. The American leftists in charge of all this destruction will not back down. They are, in fact, doubling down, and that will make a breakup inevitable. Red and blue cannot be reconciled. Perhaps the final straw will be additional election fraud or new lockdowns in 2022-2024. And then, of course, there are the deliberate attempts to start WW III…

Most are ignorant of economics and therefore fail to understand: In 2020 and 2021, economic activity massively slowed because of media and government hysteria about a mostly nonlethal virus. Instead of leaving the economy alone, the government artificially increased the demand for money when most didn’t need or want to spend much money (due to their irrational fear plus government lockdowns). When you artificially increase the supply of money at a time of historic low demand, you get inflation. And, of course, Biden’s outlawing oil production in the U.S. drove up gas prices, which in turn drives up the cost of everything. If the government stayed the hell out of economics, oil and medicine, we would all be way, way better off now.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Why is Trudeau Still a Free Man ?

Posted on by
1

The question is not: Why is he still in office? The question is: Why is he still walking free, instead of under arrest and on trial for war crimes against the Canadian people?

Ditto for Biden, all of America’s Democratic mayors and governors and many Republican ones too. When in the hell did WE become scared of THEM? THEY should be scared as hell of US.

In the old days, it was Stalin and Hitler. They were nasty, aggressive villains who at least looked the part.

Trudeau is a morally and physically puny snowflake. How low do we have to go to be threatened by such a worthless specimen of human debris?

Michael J. Hurd r, Daily Dose of Reason

Why People Can’t Face the Truth

Posted on by
Reply

John McWhorter, who teaches at Columbia, is one of a handful of blacks who write sensible things about race. He complains that the media bellow whenever police kill a black man but are silent when they kill a white man, and worries that claims of “systemic racism” are leading to a movement to exempt blacks from standards.

But Prof. McWhorter’s Substack review of Charles Murray’s latest book, Facing Reality, is deliberately blind. Its value goes beyond Prof. McWhorter, however, because it’s an explicit statement of the mental prison people on the Left and Right build for themselves — and for the country: “I reject facts I don’t like.”

Prof. McWhorter starts by patting himself on the back for his broadmindedness — “Murray’s work is too carefully reasoned and too deeply founded on scholarly sources to be dismissed as ‘racist’ ” — though he will dismiss it for equally disgraceful reasons.

Prof. McWhorter summarizes the book:

Facing Reality is seriously disturbing. Murray gives a great deal of evidence for two points. One is that black people aren’t, on the average, as intelligent as other people. The other is that black people in America are more violent than others.

Prof. McWhorter accepts that blacks are more violent, but insists it’s because of welfare, drugs, fatherlessness, etc. The part about IQ, though, “is tough reading.” Instead of attacking Dr. Murray’s data — he admits he can’t — he writes:

I suspect, in my gut, that the issue is cultural . . . . Abstract tests are a highly artificial thing . . . . Black American culture may be less consonant with that way of approaching things than white or Asian culture, and . . . could subtly discourage black kids from mastering the knack of jumping through the hoop.

Prof. McWhorter surely knows that white and Asian children do not spend their weekends “mastering the knack” of Raven’s Progressive Matrices. Still, he prefers to think blacks are just as smart, but have a “subtle cultural resistance to demonstrating it.” To his credit, he adds: “I openly admit, though, that this is also the way I hope it is, and that’s not science.” His hopes are no defense against Prof. Murray’s data.

There’s worse: “[I]t’s reasonable to ask of Murray: Why are you airing this information?” This is an odd question from someone who “airs” widely ignored information on crime rates and police killings. The subject of race and IQ just bothers him. I suppose it’s impossible to expect even an associate professor at Columbia to understand that Dr. Murray might just want to correct a widespread error.

Prof. McWhorter cites Dr. Murray’s own reasons for this unfortunate “airing:” “One is that Affirmative Action too often puts semicompetent people in government jobs.” But as Dr. Murray points out, it’s a whole lot more than “government jobs.” For example, white K-12 teachers and nurses have a 15-point IQ advantage over black teachers and nurses, and this is reflected in their performance ratings. Prof. McWhorter wants good schools for blacks. Wouldn’t he want good teachers for them, even if they are white? But he’s not worried by affirmative action: “I have a hard time seeing this [legions of semicompetents] as precisely a national tragedy.” He needs to look a little harder. Obsessions with “diversity” are already corrupting science itself. As one wag put it, in a country turning brown, the national tragedy of incompetence “will come slowly, then suddenly.”

Prof. McWhorter cites Dr. Murray’s other reason to let loose with the facts about race and IQ: “[I]dentity politics — as in racial set-asides and a tacit media conspiracy to keep disproportionate rates of black crime under wraps — is about to create a revolutionarily inclined white identity that will plunge America into a race war.” That’s a very poor summary of Dr. Murray’s argument, which I describe better — and dissect — here. Prof. McWhorter shrugs it off as alarmist.

Finally, here is Prof. McWhorter’s true objection to learning about race and IQ: If the facts are as Dr. Murray says, meritocracy would mean that “we need to accept an America in which black people are rarely encountered in jobs requiring serious smarts.” He adds: “I would have to work very hard to come up with a way of accepting that world.” So there you have it. Prof. McWhorter wants a certain kind of world, and doesn’t care how many facts we have to smother and how many whites and Asians we have to punish for him to get it.

Anyone who thinks for a living — and I imagine that’s what Prof. McWhorter fancies himself — must accept data, no matter how disagreeable, if he can find no fault with them. Anything less is cowardice or bad faith.

Prof. McWhorter’s funk over the data is important because he isn’t just anybody. He’s not completely blinded by the fog that hangs over every American university. He writes about the folly of thinking that it is “racist” to expect blacks to get math answers right. He ridicules the vendetta against Dr. Seuss. He worries about Critical Race Theory and the progressives’ grim “duty of identifying racism wherever they can find it.” He realizes that “woke” mobs are taking over institutions and “the alt-right” isn’t, and that there’s something wrong when people seriously claim that music theory is “white supremacist.”

But Prof. McWhorter has no idea where the madness comes from. He refuses to understand that it comes from denying the very facts he wants Charles Murray to shut up about. What explanation for black failure can there be but “white racism” if we can’t talk about race differences? Prof. McWhorter’s “culture” explanation only pushes the “racism” explanation back a step. How did blacks, stripped by slavery of their original culture, get this miserable “culture”? Obviously, whites gave it to them. That’s why we have to discover and root out imagined “racism” in music theory and in police shootings and in Prof. McWhorter’s favorite Dr. Seuss book. It’s also why Critical Race Theory is indispensable: It is the inherent malevolence of every living white man, boy, and baby that stifles the native genius of the black race. Blacks can reach their potential only when whites learn how awful they are, and dedicate their lives to atonement.

Many people would say of Prof. McWhorter: “Of course he can’t accept the truth. He’s black.” I don’t like that argument. Anyone with imagination can see past the end of his own nose when he looks at the world. I know no race realist who doesn’t accept the data on IQ differences between whites and Asians (though Prof. McWhorter seems to fear only the black/white gap, not the even greater black/Asian gap).

Like it or not, Prof. McWhorter is braver than almost every white academic. He read Facing Reality and didn’t just call it trash. He admitted he can’t disprove the data and that his “hopes” about black IQ “aren’t science.” That is a lot further than most whites would go.

I suspect Prof. McWhorter is mentally hobbled by something more than his race. Our climate of racial-moral zealotry doesn’t just punish people who say the wrong thing; it makes them incapable of even thinking the wrong thing.

Jared Taylor

Freedom: A Birthright, But Not a Guarantee

Posted on by
Reply

Back when the Patriot Act was passed, people like us tried to warn you: If the federal government can do whatever it wants to you in the name of “fighting terrorism”, then the federal government can do whatever it wants to you in the name of anything else.

When COVID fascism broke out, people like us tried to warn you: “This will go on forever.” Now, into year three, we’re trying to warn you again: “If the government can do whatever it wants in the name of fighting a virus (even an overwhelmingly nonlethal one), then the federal government will literally get away with anything.”

Election fraud, forced vaccinations with experimental drugs and no liability whatsoever for the companies making millions off it, brazen deceit, deliberately induced inflation, elimination of our country’s borders and destruction of the energy supply … are you convinced YET?

With Canadians unable to support political opposition or dissension without having their bank accounts frozen and their dogs seized and murdered, we’re also trying to warn you: “If it can happen up there, it can certainly happen here.” Most in America don’t seem to care all that much about what happened in Canada, and the leftists in America — who control all of education and media, and all of the federal government — have expressed total approval of these measures. They want the same here, and more.

You think concentration camps or some equivalent cannot and will never come to America? What’s to stop them? Certainly no mass opposition. Certainly not the media, the schools or the courts. What’s to stop them? Why would they not try such a thing? They’re all sociopaths and psychopaths, with unlimited power, people you would never let near your own children.

Freedom may be a birthright. But it’s not a guarantee. Throughout human history, the norm has been for freedom to be brutally and thoroughly violated. The United States of America, for a couple of shining centuries, showed that trend could be reversed.

But now millions of us sit here and either (1) applaud tyranny, demanding more (the 30-40 percent who still support Biden); or (2) complacently sigh, “Well, it can’t happen here. This is America. We’ll always be free.” Trump will rescue us. Or someone else will. But we can sit passively and wait because, after all, we are destined to be free.

No. We’re not destined to be anything other than what our choices give us.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Wealth and its Creation

Posted on by
Reply

Adam Smith recognized the nature and cause of wealth; it results from the development and extension of the division of labor. As Smith observed, “It is the great multiplication of the productions of all different arts, in consequence of the division of labour, which occasions, in a well-grounded society, that universal opulence which extends itself to the lowest ranks of the people.” This market process is the source of wealth, since it brings individuals freely pursuing their own interests into voluntary cooperation with others. For example, an individual who specializes in mechanics, cooperates, perhaps unknowingly, with those specializing in physics, chemistry, meteorology, mining, steel production, and hundreds of other fields to create travel by airplane and make it possible to fly to almost any major city in the world. It is through the division of labor, peaceful cooperation, and free exchange—the market process—that wealth is created….

The market process is the source of new wealth. It does not redistribute wealth to the powerful at the expense of others, such as in a collectivized economy; rather, it enables new goods and services to come into the marketplace. A free market system is a positive sum system. Remarkably, the standard of living can rise, even though the population is increasing, because the total amount of wealth is not fixed. Transfer payments, on the other hand, come at the expense of wealth creators—workers, businessmen, investors, and successful entrepreneurs.

Contrary to popular sentiment, high incomes and high profits are key elements of the process which generates our prosperity. High incomes and profits are the reward a person receives for serving his fellowmen. More specifically, profits are the reward for reducing costs and using scarce resources most efficiently in the competition to satisfy consumer desires. By rewarding with profits those who successfully satisfy consumer demand, the free market maximizes the incentives to create goods and services. By permitting the accumulation of wealth, it also maximizes the amount of capital available to produce more. Profits direct this capital to where it is most vitally needed in order to meet consumer demand. Even Samuel Gompers, father of the American labor movement, recognized that “the worst crime against working peoples is a company which fails to operate at a profit.”

Envy, covetousness and hatred toward those with wealth is ill-advised. As Ludwig von Mises pointed out in Human Action, “The very principle of capitalist entrepreneur-ship is to provide for the common man…. There is in the market economy no other means of acquiring and preserving wealth than by supplying the masses in the best and cheapest way with all the goods they ask for.” Evidence of this was the success of that creative genius, Thomas Edison, who fulfilled his pledge to make the light bulb so cheap that only the rich could afford candles. As Brian Summers commented in the Spring, 1981 issue of The Lincoln Review, “It is true,… that a few captains of industry accumulated great fortunes, but they became wealthy through mass production of goods and services which raised the common man’s standard of living.”

High incomes and profits, the incentives to invest and produce, are put to work, provided they are not confiscated by government. The motive for wanting a larger income and higher profits should not be a concern of economics; whether for a base reason or a high-minded objective, the only way to get more, in a free market economy, is to serve others. The way to lessen poverty is to create a favorable environment for investment and wealth creation. In fact, when William E. Simon was Treasury Secretary, he suggested to a Senate committee that, “If you really want to help the poor, help the rich. They’re the ones who will invest, build more factories, create more jobs.”

* Excerpted from “What Causes Wealth,” by Roger Ream (August 1981)

The Hostile Takeover Of The Republican Party Will Continue

Posted on by
Reply

Being a Republican voter is no easy thing.  Social media censor you.  Companies fire you.  The Department of Justice persecutes you.  Democrats assault and harass you.  And all the while, most Republican Party “leaders” stand back and do nothing as they watch.  We’ve got the only political party in modern history controlled by a small group of elected officials who fundamentally disagree with the prevailing viewpoints of 90% of the voters who put them in office.

Election after election, their unstated yet indisputable campaign slogan is simply, “Vote for us because we don’t hate you quite as much as the other guys.”  (I’m not even sure that’s true!)

This disconnect between Republican voters and Republican oligarchs has endured for decades, but I do not think it will survive much longer.  The reason why is that the average Joe has figured out D.C.’s Uniparty game: take one “ruling class” dedicated to power and money and nothing more, divide that small class of swindlers into two nearly identical political parties, pretend those two criminal cabals hate each other when the opposite is true, and present the American people with a choice-in-name-only every election.

You can vote for the Big Government socialists invested in totalitarianism or the Big Government socialists invested in empire and world domination.  (Note: The parties may swap that small distinction depending on the decade.)  That’s American “democracy” in a nutshell — a hallowed ritual for electing criminals to positions of power from where they can commit even grander crimes with impunity in the name of the people.  In exchange for their dedication to fleecing and betraying us, we christen streets, marble halls, and naval vessels after their worst offenders.

Name another profession whose whole business model is centered on creating problems where none exists, so that the same people who created them can spend enormous sums of money guaranteed to make things worse.  Only politicians could declare a “war on poverty,” waste tens of trillions of dollars, and get more poverty.  Only criminal kingpins could declare a “war on drugs” while keeping America’s unprotected borders open to narco-terrorists and subsidizing the pharmaceutical industry in its efforts to hook Americans on opiates.Only an unpatriotic Uniparty invested in making money, not achieving victory, could spend two decades at war, accomplish little, botch retreat, and then repopulate the homeland with nationals from the same countries we’ve been fighting.  If poverty, drug use, and global threats to peace have never been worse, then the politicians are winning!  Stealing taxpayers’ wealth to create crises that require stealing more from taxpayers is the normal business cycle of the ruling class.  Only policy failure can produce success!

Once people grasp this perverse incentive structure for elected criminals, then seemingly inscrutable problems become easy to understand.  Is it true that the U.S. government was actually investing money in the same Chinese bio-weapons lab that may have unleashed COVID-19 upon the world?  Why would the feds use taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous experiments in a communist country that is arguably America’s most serious geopolitical foe?  Those reasonable questions presume that officials infused with a bare modicum of ethics or morality represent us.

Ask instead: has the “health emergency” given our gangster government more authority?  Has it allowed congressional criminals to spend recklessly on an ever-mutating problem?  Has it widened the divide between the powerful and the powerless?  If so, then aiding our enemies in the development of bio-weapons has been a rousing success.  Once you accept that the Uniparty produces for mass consumption both misery and misery’s antidote, then any manner of duplicitous treachery against American citizens makes perfect sense.

Now try your hand at immigration and inflation.  Thirty years ago, Americans had the strongest middle class in the world.  That should have been a good thing, right?  Not if your business model depends on voters being dependent on government checks!  A robust middle class means economic self-sufficiency and independence.  An impoverished population means an empowered government.

Seen from the vantage point of our ruling criminals, they had no other choice than to offshore American jobs in exchange for lucrative trade “deals” (and boatloads of campaign donations) that turned a small number of millionaires into billionaires while hurting everyone else.

Fewer blue-collar jobs meant lower pay, but then government could swoop in, play hero, and hike the minimum wage.  Hiking the minimum wage meant even fewer jobs, but then the government could hook up the new workless class to its sweet welfare drip for life.  Increased government spending increases inflation, which increases the cost of living, which increases government-imposed minimum wages, which increases the cost of doing business in America, which produces even more off-shoring of blue-collar jobs, which leaves even more Americans dependent on government welfare.

Eventually, irresponsible government spending increases inflation to such an extent that an American labor force is no longer economically viable for employers.  So what is government’s solution?  Mass illegal immigration, of course!  And that’s a “solution” that only further reduces workers’ historically low salaries, financially crushing Americans already struggling to survive rampant, runaway inflation.

For three decades, the Uniparty has promised Americans high-paying “service economy” jobs in exchange for exporting their old jobs overseas.  Instead, Americans lost their savings, economic security, future prospects, and happiness.  Cheap flat-screen televisions and laundry machines that break after sixteen months have been their only rewards.

For those not hooked on the opiate of welfare, Big Pharma saw an opportunity in returning veterans struggling with pain to use actual opiates to hook the rest.  In the process, the corrupt ruling class has imported so many foreign nationals that the bonds of American community and culture have been worn thin, and anyone who has had the temerity to object to this monumental transformation of society is accused of xenophobia or racism.

It’s difficult to look at all this carnage and not ask, as El Salvador’s president has, whether there is a “deliberate plan” to “destroy the U.S. from within.”  Seen from the globalist cartel’s obvious goal of restoring a system of feudalism where a small number of lords can control a continent of serfs, the answer is clear: yes!

It’s now been nearly fifteen years since Republican voters began rebelling against the criminal class in D.C.  The Tea Party movement sent a slew of new members to Congress in 2010, but Old Guard Republicans converted some and undermined others.  Undeterred, Republican voters found an outsider in Donald Trump and put him in the White House.  Again, Old Guard Republicans worked with their Uniparty pals to sabotage the Trump presidency, subvert the 2020 election with mass mail-in balloting, and deflate the passions of his ardent supporters.

Those efforts have not had their intended effect.  After two impeachments, a fake insurrection, and several years of political persecution, Republican voters have never been more angry.  They know that Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and Mitt Romney are shills for an unelected Deep State, and they despise those political relics for their misplaced loyalties.  They see how easily the Ben Sasses, Liz Cheneys, Adam Kinzingers, and Dan Crenshaws of the party have betrayed them, and they will not forget.

Either Republican voters will succeed in fundamentally changing the Republican Party so that it aligns with and represents their interests, or they will demolish that party and bury its remains deep in the desert.  Any Republican officeholder unwilling or unable to accept this new reality is a politician with a short shelf life.  The 2022 midterms may bring a “red wave,” but until the Uniparty is defeated, there will be no peace.

J. B. Shurk

Mad as Hell

Posted on by
Reply

The core of leftism is that we are all supposed to live for others. We’re supposed to sacrifice any wealth we have for others, so things may be equal. We’re supposed to sacrifice our brains and pretend that a circle is a square and a boy is a girl so that the intellectually inferior or mentally disturbed may feel equal. We’re supposed to wear masks forever and get experimental shots from companies with no liability or cost for what happens, so that we can say, “everybody got vaccinated.” The theme is always the same with leftists: Down with the individual, up with the collective.

The thing about leftists? They subscribe to self-sacrifice — in words and theory, but never in practice. The thing they claim we all must do is what they’re never, ever prepared to do. That’s why you won’t find any of the high profile leftists wearing masks. That’s why Obama builds a home in the midst of rising seas he claims are caused by regular people using fossil fuels (fuels that he uses in abundance, by the way). That’s why leftists are suddenly jingoists when it comes to World War III, so long as all they have to do is change their Facebook or Instagram profile page to sport a picture of the Ukraine flag.

“Look at me. I’m self-sacrificial. I’m virtuous.” This is ALL leftism is. It’s about as substantive as cotton candy.

Leftists are ALL about optics and ONLY about optics. Either they don’t believe what they claim about the alleged virtue of self-sacrifice, or they don’t think what they preach applies to them. Perhaps they think they’re special, because they proclaim the glory of self-sacrifice for all … and since they’re so virtuous in doing so, they don’t have to practice it. The rest of us do.

The arrogance of all this is so incomprehensibly evil that it MUST — I repeat MUST — lead to the biggest social psychological (and perhaps literal) upheaval and/or explosion ever seen before in the history of mankind. It is not sustainable. We cannot go on like this and will positively NOT go on like this. How it all plays out nobody can predict. But it will play out. It has probably already started, and we don’t yet recognize it. Trump is merely the tip of the iceberg of what’s coming — and what SHOULD be coming.

The built-up anger, sense of injustice, feelings of powerlessness and perfectly reasonable rage many of us feel eventually have to go somewhere. And wherever that is, the leftists who so brazenly live in hypocrisy and hubris are not going to like it.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason