BrExiting The Globalist Movement

Maybe I'm missing something, but can anyone explain to me how Britain leaving the European Union is a bad thing?

How is it "bad" for a nation to assert its sovereignty?

How is it "bad" to put an end to laws affecting a nation's citizens being written by people who are not citizens of that nation?

Last I heard, somewhere in the neighborhood of 80% of laws governing the Brits are written OUTSIDE OF BRITAIN. That's akin to Canada and Mexico writing U.S law. I don't know what anyone else thinks, but I'm pretty sure I'd rather the U.S. write U.S. law.

So far, the analyses I've been hearing about this historic vote have all been placing the "blame" for Britain's exit from the EU squarely on the older voters, particularly those over 50. They voted overwhelmingly for exiting.

Some talking heads have said they voted for the exit because they won't have to face the consequences. They'll be dead before the consequences reach their fullest. In other words, they were being selfish.

I have a different take on it. Perhaps the elder voters were doing what they could to protect the nation as best they knew how. Just maybe - and this is just a shot in the dark - they understand better than the younger voters (under 39 voters voted overwhelmingly in favor of staying in the EU) that a nation not governed by those with its best interests at heart isn't much of a nation. It's entirely likely that they didn't see a British future worth looking at and rejected that future.

Maybe, just maybe, our elders actually know what they're talking about.

Perhaps we should start listening to what they have to say. ~ Hunter

We Volunteered...

We stood watch while you slept, but we volunteered.

We were the line between civilized people and the savages, but we volunteered.

We lost precious friends, blood brothers, treasured sisters as you went about your lives, but we volunteered.

We safeguarded your freedoms, even as you threw them away, but we volunteered.

We threw myself into the fray, fended off the wolves, so you could rest easy, but we volunteered.

Do not grieve for us, for we have completed our work here. We have left this battle for the peace of God's love.

Instead, celebrate that we lived.

Remember us all the days of your lives. Remember our brothers and sisters who still fight, and die, for you.

Remember our mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, sons and daughters we left behind.

So go to your barbecues, your parties, your fireworks. We don't mind, for had our check not been cashed, we'd likely do the same.

All we ask is that you teach your children what this day is really about. Teach them to love America, despite her faults and foibles.

Instruct them in the ways of freedom, so that they realize the sacrifices that were made so they could be free.

We now stand with our brothers and sisters in an unbroken line that stretches back to the founding of this great nation. We stand with mighty company.

We pray that the day comes when no more need join us, but until that day, know that we would do it again if it was asked of us.

We volunteered, so you didn't have to. ~ Hunter

Memorial Day 2016

I Choose Principles Over Party

Isn't it funny how the people who were warned repeatedly that if they selected a nominee who didn't represent conservatism we conservatives wouldn't vote for him are now saying if we don't vote for him, we're either liberals or pro-Hillary - often both - and we should be "ashamed of" ourselves?

We were also told that the GOP house needed to be "burned down" and that they would get The Fraud of Fifth Avenue elected without our help.

Well, you've accomplished your goal of burning down the house, so to speak. You've driven away the base of the party - the true conservatives. Now is your chance to accomplish the other part of your goal - getting The Fraud elected without our help. Good luck with that because it's not gonna happen.

You were warned.

You didn't listen.

Now you expect - no, demand - that we vote for someone who not only does not represent conservatism in any way, shape, manner, or form but is Hillary's ideological twin. Not happening.

You made this bed - sleep in it.

I will no longer play the "good little Republican" for you or to get the party the "win" when it's not the party I joined in 1988.  It certainly no longer holds but the barest shred of conservative principles.

You wanted a fascist, banana republic dictator as your nominee (not my nominee), so go get it done - ALL BY YOURSELVES. I, as well as millions of other conservatives with principles won't have an active part in the murder of the United States. Even if Hillary wins, I'll sleep with a clear conscience because I'll have done the right and moral thing.

Good luck explaining to your grandchildren why you did not. ~ Hunter

What The Results In Indiana REALLY Mean - The End Of The United States

What is one supposed to do, to think, when the party you've belonged to no longer even pretends to represent you? I'm not just talking about the Republican Party apparatus - I'm talking about the so-called "rank-and-file" voters, my neighbors, my FRIENDS.
When I say I will never vote for The Fraud of Fifth Avenue, I actually mean it. I can no longer justify voting for the "lesser of two evils." Progressivism has so weakened the moral fiber of this nation and her people that many are voting just for sheer vengeance.
It doesn't matter to them that the Republican frontrunner supported Obama and Clinton. They no longer care about their supposedly conservative principles of smaller government, lower taxes, less regulation. They've proved it by voting for a small-minded "man" with a god-complex who stands for everything they stood against just a single year ago.
Have we fallen that far? Is it possible that patriotism has given way to hatefulness as a virtue? How could conservatism become so bastardized that we fail to see the progressive nature of a candidate who's ostensibly on "our" side? What has become of our party, our country, our fellow citizens?
I've lost several friends over this election cycle because I will not be silent about what I see, nor will I tolerate the trash coming from supposedly informed people. I don't have a problem with that in the slightest. I can only give people information; I can't make them think critically about it.
It shames me to know that the life of the United States of America hangs literally by a thread and I can do nothing about it. it terrifies me that my grandchildren will never know the type of freedom I enjoyed and I can't stop it from happening. It chills me to the bone that the party that once stood for freedom and equality for ALL stands poised to nominate a dictator-in-waiting and I can do NOTHING TO PREVENT IT.
Do freedom and liberty mean so little to Americans anymore that we have to elect another big government leftist, but one who poses as a capitalist? Are we so selfish that we would doom for all time our children and grandchildren? I pray that we're not, yet fear that we are. Too many are far more concerned with the here and now that they fail to consider the future and mark my words - that future will NOT be a bright or pretty one.
If there's a silver lining to all this - and I know I'm really stretching for this one - it's that I've come to realize that the rampant stupidity and blind "cult of personality" mindset is not limited solely to the demoKKKrats and liberals. It fully infects the Right as well.
A vote for anyone other than the only candidate who knows the Constitution - what it says, what it means, and how we need to get back on the path the Founders set out for us - is a conscious effort to drive a knife into the heart of America. I won't do it. I CAN'T do it, If that drives a wedge between us as friends, neighbors, countrymen - so be it. That's a cross I can I can bear.
I will not be party to the rape and murder of that which I hold most dear - the United States of America. I hope to God Himself that I'm wrong and I will be the first to admit it if it turns out to be so but after a lifetime of watching and following all things political, I seriously doubt that I am.
I no longer have a party, not because I have changed so much that I no longer fit in but because the party has changed so much that I no longer recognize it as my home. ~ Hunter
"I didn't leave my party. My party left me."

Some Questions For Trump Supporters

For those of you who haven't yet seen The Fraud of Fifth Avenue's town hall style interview on the Today Show last Thursday, I present the pertinent part:

A few quick questions for his supporters, if I may.

1) How do you - especially the conservatives out there - justify voting for someone on the Republican side of the aisle (although I submit that he's anything but) whose views are nearly identical to Hillary's?

Seriously, I need an answer to that because there's no way, in my opinion, to make that leap and still call yourself a "conservative."

2) How does this not disturb you? How does this not make you think twice about supporting him?

3) Given that his new campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was caught - on tape - speaking to GOP insiders saying that Trump is "playing a role" and you'll see the real Trump soon - that audio was played on Fox News Sunday - which Trump will you vote for?

It's been clear to me from day one of his campaign that he's been disingenuous - if not outright lying - about who he is, what he believes, and what his core values are. How is it not clear to you?

4) How can you still seriously call him "anti-establishment" when he's now hiring all Beltway insiders for his campaign? I mean, we're talking about people who have been around D.C. for decades.

5) While we're at it, aren't you the same people who started calling Ted Cruz an "establishment" candidate because he hired Jeb Bush's campaign finance manager? Care to rethink that call now?

Bottom line here is this: I've said since the beginning of this election cycle that one has to take into account the entirety of a candidate's life before offering your support to that candidate. And yes, that includes Trump and his lifelong left-leaning positions.

If there's anything I've learned during all the time I've been following politics, which is roughly 35 years, it's that a candidate's past positions tend to inform his/her present positions.

In the past, Trump has supported abortion - up to and including partial-birth abortion, which is as heinous and vile an act as I can think of. All abortions are evil, as far as I'm concerned - the act of abortion, not all of the women getting them (some are evil, and I will forever hold that belief).

Now, he wants to amend the Republican platform to include exceptions for abortions? How is this conservative?

In the past, Trump has supported higher taxes on the wealthy - even though they already pay nearly 50% of all federal taxes paid.

Trump still supports raising taxes on the wealthy. Not so conservative, is it?

What more will it take for you to realize that you're being played? ~ Hunter

P.S., I really do want someone to answer these questions because I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would support a candidate who's nearly identical to Hillary in every way that matters.

Contamination

I just finished reading the first four books of a series called "Contamination." The series details a shadowy organization's apocalyptic viral attack on the southwestern United States.

This organization releases a virus into food and water supplies of various towns and cities that turns most people into vile, murderous creatures not unlike zombies. Slightly derivative of some more popular stories across various media, but enjoyable nonetheless, if a bit short.

Some characters pop up in the storyline to interact with the main protagonists - almost all determined to do evil. These characters got me wondering about what humanity might become if society completely broke down.

I'd LIKE to think that society, as a whole - more specifically, American society - would do everything in their power to help their fellow man. The more I thought about it, however, it slowly dawned on me that we probably wouldn't.

That bothers me more than you could know. It shames me to think that man's inhumanity towards man might be the norm rather than the exception.

All I have to do is look at many of the people supporting Trump in the election cycle. The way they treat those who disagree with them is the social media equivalent of the "human wave" attacks on American soldiers in Vietnam. They're seemingly all truly vile. I've made no secret of my opposition to Trump and if you read my blog or peruse my Facebook page you'll know my reasons for that opposition, so I'll not repeat them here.

I have received death threats (which I don't take too seriously) and many other vile, nasty, disgusting comments for that opposition.

I mostly just laugh at them, but today I noticed a comment on a meme I posted yesterday. The meme mocked Trump's ridiculous statement that 9/11 was worse than the attack on Pearl Harbor. A Trump supporter actually said that even despite that comment, he was still the best candidate running.

My response was basically "Only if you're not concerned with the Constitution." He then proceeded to say that the Constitution DOES NOT MATTER because people "only pull it out when it suits their purpose." I am not kidding.

Essentially, this "man" confirmed, at least for me, what I've said since Trump began his run - he and most of his supporters care nothing for this country. They SAY they do, but being willing to throw away the very foundation of this nation pretty much says otherwise.

The people in "Contamination" are essentially the same. They destroyed the foundations of their own humanity in order to prey on others.

Destroying the Constitutional underpinnings of this nation is as bad to me as destroying your own humanity. Neither are acceptable to me under any circumstances. Period.

I may not be able to do anything to prevent a proverbial "zombie apocalypse," but as long as I draw breath the Constitution of the United States of America will never die. If you seek to supplant, subvert, damage or destroy it in any way, you are my enemy and the enemy of this nation.

Trump Cries "Foul" Over Wyoming But Remains Silent About Hawaii

Clearly the Drumpf doesn't know, much less understand, the process by which the Republicans choose the nominee. Maybe I can clear it up for him and his campaign "team." Personally, I think they're too busy eating their crayons to get it, but I can at least try. Here we go...

1) The number of delegates required to have the nomination "handed" to you is ironclad at 1,237. Got it? Good.

2) Anything short of 1,237 - even by one single lonely delegate - is grounds for an "open" convention. Not likely to happen, but still a remote possibility. Got it? Good.

3) Each state has their own rules for selecting their delegates and how those delegates vote during the convention.

a) Some states are "winner take all" - meaning every delegate from that state must vote for the primary/caucus winner of the state on the first ballot.

b) Some states are "winner take most" - meaning the winner receives the votes of most of the delegates while other candidates receive a few as well.

c) Some states' delegates are "apportioned" - meaning the percentage of votes a given candidate will receive is commensurate to how well they did in that state's primary/caucus.

d) Some states, like PA, have rules that say the majority of delegates are not bound by the state's primary results. In essence, they are free to vote however they wish.

***For the record, I'm well aware that I've stripped the processes down to the bare bones minimum, but I kinda-sorta had to. How else will Drumpf and his team understand? I don't have the proper amount of crayons or construction paper it would take to really explain it to them. Just sayin'.***

My point is that it's the state's Republican Party apparatus that sets the rules for how and when delegates are chosen and who they vote for in the convention. These rules have been known for well over a year.

For The Fraud of Fifth Avenue and his team to be crying "foul" now shows how ill-prepared he is for just a simple election. It has to make one wonder how he'll ever be prepared if he wins the presidency, God forbid.

Calling the Colorado system "rigged" while remaining silent about a nearly identical process in Hawaii is especially enlightening to those of us who are actually paying attention. The only major difference between the 2 states is that the Cheetos Kid won Hawaii and lost Colorado.

Puts it in perspective, does it not? ~ Hunter

P.S., A plurality of delegates does not equal a majority. Period. End of story.