Category Archives: Uncategorized
Last week, I began hosting a new weekly radio program, titled “I Protest.” It will air live every Wednesday, from 3-5 pm est. My first guest was the legendary show business veteran turned JFK assassination researcher John Barbour. There were some technical glitches, but those will be ironed out.
This Wednesday, my guest will be William Matson Law, in my view the most under recognized name in the JFK assassination research community, and the leading expert on the medical aspects of the case. The following week, I’ll be welcoming renowned peace activist Cindy Sheehan to the show.
The show will undoubtedly evolve and grow over time, but my intention is to combine my own commentary on social and political issues with an intriguing array of guests. Eventually, once I grow more comfortable in my new role as host, I want to incorporate phone calls from listeners into the broadcast.
The show is part of the huge IHeartRadio network, giving it the potential for a great audience. The hosts are paid via listener support. If you want to support me, please consider clicking on the “Sign me up” link under my picture and program logo at the following link: https://tfrlive.com/iprotest/
I hate holding out the figurative begging cup, but I am still battling with my former employer regarding my unfair job termination earlier this year. Thus, what little income I have comes from my writing, and is not steady or consistent. If you like my writing, please consider helping out.
Because I am writing regularly now for the American Free Press and will also be contributing to the new Deep Truth Journal, I will probably not be writing as regularly on my blog, and when I do will be more likely to concentrate on my personal work situation.
A few days ago, American voters proved once again that they are incapable of throwing the bums out. And at this point, does anyone really dispute that they are bums? That is, of course, if the votes are actually being counted. Which might very well not be the case.
As is typical in virtually every U.S. election for at least the last fifty years, over 95 percent of incumbent members of the House were returned to office. “Only” 89 percent of our esteemed Senators were reelected. What does this persistent message of voter approval do, other than to empower our thoroughly retched “representatives” and encourage them to continue their peculiar brand of “public service?” More nonstop war. More immigration. More foreign visa workers. More corporate welfare and consolidation of wealth in the greedy hands of the elite.
This is what the American people evidently want. Apparently, they think the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein are just the kind of leaders America needs, as it further crumbles into Third World status. I devoted a section of Survival of the Richest to our “best and brightest” political representatives. The names change, but the empty rhetoric, the lack of principles, and the absolute failure to do anything at all to improve things for the majority of the people is an American constant.
Meanwhile, the polls out there still suggest that approval for Congress is at an all-time low. There have been various laughable explanations for this, trotted out by the usual suspects in the establishment press. “Most people hate Congress, but love their own representatives,” is the most common rationale. This is absurd; what has any “representative” done for any average person? Why would any average person feel that they’d been represented well by these career party hacks?
I remember all the “vote them all out” efforts over the years. There was a “Clean House, Senate, Too” movement thirty years or so ago. None of them worked. Invariably, 90 percent or more of these awful people are returned to office by those who ostensibly have the power to fire them. And they just don’t, or won’t do it.
Now I’m assuming that these votes are actually being counted, which is probably a naive thing to do. So if the fraud is that massive, and voters are really intelligent and informed enough to be attempting to turn these glorified welfare recipients back out onto the street, I apologize to them. In that case, it’s obviously not your fault, and the ballot box is no longer an option. Certainly, both sides believe the process is rigged, but they are locked into their foolish partisanship and think that it’s only rigged against their particular favorite in our carbon-copy “two” party system.
The Democrats will finger the “Russians.” The Republicans will perhaps quietly mumble something about the untold numbers of non-citizens that are incomprehensibly being allowed to vote in our elections, but otherwise will vaguely lash out at the “Democrats” who cheated their candidate. The late Collier brothers exposed the corrupt nature of our electoral process in their excellent Votescam many years ago, and I included a lot of their story in my own book Hidden History.
There were some especially comedic aspects to this midterm election. A Trump supporter, brothel owner Dennis Hof, was elected to the Nevada State Assembly. The fact that he’d died the month before didn’t seem to have much of an impact on those astutely rocking the vote. In a lurid detail that didn’t come from the Onion, Hof’s body was discovered by legendary porn star Ron Jeremy. And he was romantically involved with “Hollywood Madam” Heidi Fleiss.
Not to be outdone, Texas Democrats reelected Don Reynolds, who is presently serving a one year sentence in jail. Adding electoral insult to injury, Reynolds ran unopposed. Think about that; the only candidate is in jail, yet the “opposing” party can’t even run anyone against him? Not that the non-inmate was likely to win, of course. After all, Reynolds was an incumbent.
If American voters are truly responsible for basically disenfranchising themselves, by continuously returning such despicable snake oil salesmen to office, they deserve all the pain and suffering that will inexorably occur when this casino economy crashes. If they really think that these kinds of people are the best this country has to offer, and that they provide any kind of “representation” whatsoever, then there is no further point in trying to communicate with them.
Donald Trump has expressed his support for congressional term limits. The whole term limits issue was all the rage back in the early 1990s. The Republicans included it as a plank in their Contract with America. Predictably, once these Republicans wrested control of Congress, their ardor for term limits evaporated. Trump says so many things, some of them quite good, but he rarely follows up with anything concrete. My guess is any term limits proposal coming from him will emanate from that dark corner of the White House where he produces a steady stream of feverish tweets on Twitter.
It’s hard to overthrow tyranny when your friends and neighbors keep giving the tyrants their stamp of approval. Donald Trump has accomplished one very bad thing; he has divided the country essentially into two equal warring camps, with each side firmly planting themselves behind one of our comical “opposing” parties. Trump is the worst thing to happen to any viable Third Party movement in a very long time. Even many of those who were Libertarians, or Green Party members, have coalesced behind either the HiPapaLowems or the LowPapaHiems, as Huey Long mocked the Democrats and Republicans, because of their strong feelings for or against Trump.
In the great midterm elections of 2018, we were advised repeatedly that this was “the most important” election of our lifetimes. We are advised that this is the case in nearly every election, of course, but Americans have shockingly short memory spans. It was hard to determine the issues that this election revolved around, other than being a general referendum on Donald Trump. No candidate was demanding we bring the troops home from all the nonsensical places where they are stationed, or end the perpetual occupations and bombings of other sovereign nations.
This was a passionate “us” against “them” battle, and it was tragic to watch. Allegedly intelligent voters figuratively waving their beers in the air, and screaming at the “opposition” like they were watching the Super Bowl. No talk of peace. Or auditing the Fed. Or that autism-vaccine commission to be chaired by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. No demands for a desperately overdue infrastructure rebuild and upgrade. Americans instead collectively were declaring, “I’ll take transgender bathrooms for five hundred, Alex!”
Both sides in the phony left-right paradigm are claiming victory. In reality, as always happens in our elections, no average American won.
We all claim to at least acknowledge the profundity of “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” But who really follows the Golden Rule? I’ve seen one example of the Golden Rule being applied in my lifetime, and that was from a close friend who shocked me by offering a gift to someone who had just been mean and ungenerous to him. He was hardly religious, and may not even have realized what he was doing. But it moved me deeply and left a huge impact on me.
Most of us have difficulty getting along well with our loved ones. Dysfunction is normal in American families. It’s even expected, and promoted relentlessly by the culture. So imagine how hard it is to be kind to those who have not been kind to us. Jesus told us to love our enemies, as well as our neighbors. Most Americans feel fortunate if they’re not feuding with their neighbors. I really have never met anyone who is magnanimous enough to love those who despise them.
As a civil libertarian dinosaur, I’m prone to speak up for those who are being figuratively lynched by the mob. I was inspired by Patrick Henry’s bold “I may not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to my dying day your right to say it” as a young child. They used to teach that kind of antiquated stuff in grade school. Henry was saying essentially the same thing that Voltaire said. Great minds- classic liberals- realized how important the right to free expression is.
As recently as the 1970s, many on the left truly were able to “walk a mile in the moccasins” of others. Liberals used to be concerned about prison reform, the rights of those behind bars, and unilaterally opposed capital punishment. Could Elton John’s song Have Mercy on the Criminal even be recorded today? Once Bill Clinton transformed the Democrats into social justice warriors, who were nevertheless just as enamored with war, the intelligence agencies, police power and corporate corruption as their Republican peers, civil libertarians were kicked to the curb.
Jesus said that the commandment to “love thy neighbor as thyself” was one of the two precepts upon which the entire religion stood. Despite this, most devout Christians I’ve met are remarkably lax in following it. This is especially true of the most pious, “born-again” fundamentalist types. Born-againers are also notably averse to the crucial “judge not lest ye be judged” thing. They judge constantly.
Perhaps you’re thinking that the women who unfathomably forgave their migrant rapists in other countries were, in fact, practicing the Golden Rule. On the surface, that might seem to be so, but if you study those reports, and the way the establishment left presented the issue of migration into European countries, you’ll understand that this was purely driven by political correctness, in one of the most extreme cases of Stockholm syndrome imaginable.
This is a complex issue. The absence of Civics is apparent everywhere. Civics used to be a staple of every high school’s curriculum, but it stopped being taught around 1970. Our leaders want obedient, unquestioning proles, not good citizens. Civics wasn’t just about producing good citizens. It was about transmitting values. As Aristotle recognized a very long time ago, a civilization must have a shared set of values. Clearly, in today’s America, there are almost no shared values.
The Golden Rule is the basis of human decency. Even without following it strictly, most people in the past had some kind of empathy for others. In present-day America, there is almost a complete absence of empathy. As just one example, a man dropped dead in a Target store a few years ago, during one of the yearly Black Friday displays of collective madness. No one stopped to check on him, or even appeared to notice him other than to step over his body in their quest to save a few dollars. Considering how fast America is deteriorating, today we might see youngsters posing for selfies next to his lifeless body, or perhaps stepping on or even jumping up and down on it.
America is fractured; almost completely broken around bogus, politically correct lines. Few on either the left or right would hesitate to lock someone away for life, despite any concrete evidence, simply because they “offended” them and fit their particular definition of a villain. They hate their political opposites with a venom and a passion that would appall Jesus. There is nothing about America’s present political discourse that bears the slightest resemblance to the Golden Rule.
Those associated with Donald Trump in some way have been thrown out of restaurants, or heckled until they leave them. This is pretty similar to how black people were once not permitted to dine in restaurants, but no one seems to sense the irony. All decent people found the protests of funerals by the Westboro Baptist Church to be repugnant. Considering the hypocrisy of today’s left, I think it’s a certainty that they would support identical protests of the funerals of “racists” or “Nazis” or “white supremacists.”
Donald Trump’s abrasive, divisive personality is perfect for present-day America. Certainly, it is impossible to imagine Trump forgiving others or treating them the way he would wish to be treated. He can’t even refrain from getting down in the gutter with the lowest common denominator entertainers, and exchanging juvenile poisonous barbs with them. The civil disobedience that began with Thoreau, and was utilized to great effect by Ghandi and Martin Luther King, has been supplanted by profane shouting and physical attacks on others.
We are so far removed from any “do unto others” concept that many, especially on the left, proudly advocate violent attacks on those who “offend” them. I’ve heard many people declare, “free speech doesn’t include hate speech.” Just what constitutes “hate speech,” of course, is something only they can define. Like “obscenity,” a ridiculous notion like “hate speech” is entirely in the eye of the beholder. So, if those you disagree with have no right to eat in public establishments, or to exercise their right to free speech, what rights do they have?
Obviously, if you can’t tolerate views that “offend” you, to the point of demanding that those expressing them be fired, jailed, or physically assaulted, then you certainly aren’t about to follow the Golden Rule in any way, shape, or form. I can’t count the number of parents and adult children who don’t speak to each other. Ever. Those are the closest human relationships possible. And too many people nowadays can’t even follow the Golden Rule with their own parents, or children.
Someone commented here recently that this blog was “Grumpy Old Man Central,” and questioned what century I was living in. It’s hard not to sound like a curmudgeon when looking at America’s blossoming Idiocracy. For those of us who grew up forty or fifty years ago, this is not only a different country, but an entirely different world. A different reality. A different dimension.
No, things weren’t always great back then, but there was a lot more empathy for others in general. It was a more polite world, even if “politeness,” as defined by Ambrose Bierce, is just “the most acceptable form of hypocrisy.” We need shared values. We need the Golden Rule.
When Donald Trump selected mainstream conservative Brett Kavanaugh as his Supreme Court nominee, those truly anxious to “drain the swamp” were disappointed once again. Even CNBC acknowledged that he was an “establishment favorite.” Kavanaugh has never been anyone’s kind of maverick. He has long been tied to former President George W. Bush.
The most troubling thing about Kavanaugh, to those of us who have bothered to investigate such things, is Kavanaugh’s role in covering up the death of Clinton White House counsel Vince Foster. Kavanaugh, as White House counsel under Bush, also sought to limit compensation under the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund.
With the anti-Trump fervor now at a fever pitch for half the country, it was inevitable that his nominee would be criticized. Predictably, none of the criticism leveled at Kavanaugh is based on his neocon fueled legal career. Instead, an alleged incident from thirty six years ago has now taken over all mainstream public discourse.
Christine Blasey Ford, a mainstream liberal professor with a background suitable for a political opponent of Donald Trump, has claimed that Kavanaugh attempted to sexually assault her while both were in high school. Not only are these allegations decades old, Ford evidently can’t remember anything specific about the incident; not the house, its location, how she arrived there, who was giving the party, etc. Only in our thoroughly divided country could such vague accusations from so long ago be taken seriously by anyone.
But this isn’t all. Ford has the most logical motive in the world to lodge a false accusation against Kavanaugh. In 1996, her parents were involved in foreclosure litigation, and Kavanaugh’s mother just happened to be the judge in the case, who ruled against them. An honest legal system would call that a conflict of interest. A mitigating factor. But as should be obvious to all living Americans at this point, we don’t have an honest legal system.
For those biased in favor of what I call the Evil Party, or the Democrats, Ford, like Anita Hill and anyone accusing Donald Trump of anything, has all the credibility in the world. They didn’t feel the same way about Juanita Broderick, Paula Jones, or any of the countless women who accused Bill Clinton of harassing and even raping them. The Stupid Party, or the Republicans, found them entirely credible, or course. This is the nature of our two-party system. Pick a side, and stick with them always. Contradictions and hypocrisy be damned. Our side is better!
In reality, of course, the political “debate” in this country is ludicrously restricted, and those participating must adhere to laughably narrow guidelines. Battle over gay marriage and transgender bathrooms all you want. But don’t talk about the perpetual wars, bombings and occupations, or the top secret intelligence agency budgets. And never, ever mention anything about the Federal Reserve, or the counterfeit nature of our fractional banking system.
So this “debate” is perfect for America 2.0. Screams, profanities, and threats of violence over a claim alleged thirty six years after it happened. And even if it is true, why wasn’t the underage Kavanaugh (who was seventeen at the time) a “victim” here, too? I’ve never understood how a minor, who is not legally able to consent to sex, can be charged with forcing someone else who cannot legally consent. But it’s impossible for anyone perceived to be associated with Trump to be considered a victim of anything, under any circumstances. As the establishment “liberals” love to say now: “punch a Nazi in the face” and all that.
I thought the selection of Brett Kavanaugh was stupid, much like all of Trump’s appointments have been stupid. It was clearly yet another capitulation on his part to a conservative, neocon establishment that opposed his candidacy and continues to oppose any real reforms he may attempt. But the phony debate taking center stage now is beyond stupid; it is state-sponsored theater for the dumbed-down masses. It’s hard to imagine a more fitting example of “bread and circuses.”
If a guy whose political mentor was George W. Bush can’t get approved to the Supreme Court, just who could Trump nominate that would be approved? John McCainiac’s daughter? Lindsay Graham’s child, if he had any? Barack Obama? Now that would be a nominee to make those with Trump Derangement Syndrome’s heads explode. Their ultimate object of scorn selecting their ultimate object of worship.
Those opposing Kavanaugh with all the fury they’ve opposed Trump simply have no idea why they oppose him. Sure, the usual fear mongering about overturning Roe vs. Wade has been trotted out there, but nothing else really associated with any issue. It’s just that Kavanaugh is Trump’s choice, and anyone Trump chooses has to be bad. It’s the triumph of personality over politics, and it’s Trump’s personality they hate, because his politics, at least thus far, has been little different than Dubya’s.
I’ve tried to divert the Kavanaugh-haters’ attention away from this foaming at the mouth, this unclear pussy hat rage, into productive areas. Like the fact he led the Starr “investigation” into the death of Vince Foster, and concluded against all logic and all the evidence that he killed himself in Fort Marcy Park. You have to be quite a “judge” to support these kinds of impossible official narratives. By anyone’s standards, Kavanaugh proved his establishment mantle in that “investigation” alone.
The majority of still asleep Americans will be glued to their television sets, breathlessly awaiting the showdown between the dastardly attempted teen rapist Kavanaugh, and his honorable accusers like Charles Schumer. Those of us who are awake will try to change the subject, or get them to actually think, but that’s never been an easy thing for people to do. Poet E.E. Cummings reacted to Ezra Pound’s Cantos by exclaiming, “You bastard! You’re trying to get them to think.”
Whether Brett Kavanaugh is approved or not will matter little to the average citizen. Good Supreme Court decisions are about as rare as obese Victoria’s Secret models. The last decent Supreme Court justice, in my view, was William O. Douglas, and I’m not entirely certain about him.
Instead of fretting over whether the Court will go “conservative” as opposed to “liberal,” Americans should worry about the impact they can have on our civil liberties, and the kind of world our children and grandchildren will live in. Regardless of their alleged political persuasions, Supreme Court justices, like judges at every level of the system, have proven utterly unworthy of such power.
Whenever I go out and about, to restaurants, stores, or any other place with substantial numbers of people, I am increasingly mortified by what I see. I’m not talking about the overt lack of civility, or the buried heads in smart phones. I’m referring to how the vast majority of Americans look nowadays.
When I graduated from high school in 1974, in a large class, I can recall exactly one girl who might have been considered fat. There were perhaps 2 or 3 overweight boys. In other words, the fat kids were statistically insignificant. When I drive by my local high school now, I see nothing but fat and obese teenagers. The situation has flipped completely, so that the non-overweight kids are now the anomalies.
The average American woman today weighs just under 170 pounds. The average height of an American female is about five feet three inches. The average American woman now weighs more than the average American man did fifty years ago. And the average American man now weighs almost 200 pounds and has an average waist size of just about 40 inches. When I was a kid in the 1960s and 1970s, even the heaviest people I knew didn’t wear size 40 pants. Now the average U.S. male does. The average dress size for a woman is now sixteen.
It’s not just weight. One can’t help but notice the absurdly casual, slovenly way most Americans dress now. Not at home. In public. Did anyone envision seeing adults parading around in stores wearing pajama pants? So many men and women just appear to have “punted,” to simply have stopped trying to appear attractive in any way, shape or form. Instead, they slide on their XXL sweat pants, and their XXXL tee shirts, and parade about as proudly as their in-shape ancestors did.
Factor in the gratuitous tattoos that are everywhere now. I see otherwise good-looking young girls with an entire arm, perhaps both arms, completely covered in tattoos. There’s a good reason why, in the past, only pirates and drunken sailors got tattoos. They don’t make anyone look better. And when your skin is mostly camouflaged by ugly conglomerations of ink, it automatically causes others to view you less respectively. Tramp stamps, and all that.
I regularly refer to the increasingly Third World nature of America. With our overgrown median strips, outdated airports and railways, crumbling roads and bridges, and woeful power grids, we don’t look like the world’s wealthiest country. But our people are taking on that Third World look as well. What the world used to castigate as the “ugly American” is now becoming a reality, from the inner cities to the heartland. Just look at any crowd scene from the 1950s to understand what I’m talking about; they all look like super models in comparison. And I’m not talking about color. One way in which our increasingly diverse population is assimilating well is in their weight, their unattractive dress, and their affinity for tattoos.
I realize this is a sensitive subject, especially for women. A few years back, a study was published that concluded that the startling weight gain among U.S. women over the past half century was largely related to a precipitous decline in housework. A collective cry of “Excuse Me!” emanated from every corner of this nation, and that particular study was summarily shoved down the memory hole. That’s the way political correctness works.
The other day, I went to a fast food restaurant to pick up some breakfast. I almost never do that, but my son wanted it for his birthday. The drive-through line was backed up, perhaps fifteen cars. Knowing what I do of the average American’s laziness, I parked my car and walked inside. There was no one in line there. Think about that; Americans are so unwilling to walk fifty feet from their car, that they instead wait twenty minutes in line. For “fast” food. That’s an essential reason for the weight gain; people are just lazier now. Fortunately, it’s not just women, or not just some minority group, that’s lazier. Otherwise, there would be another collective cry of “Excuse Me!” and I’d be shunned from polite society for pointing it out.
Today, while waiting for some food at a high upscale place, I again noticed not only all the overweight, unattractive people, but the truly laughable hairstyles of some. So many females, including one that had to be sixty or so, with purple or pink dyed hair. So many with uncombed, sloppy hair. Too many with that extra short look that often advertises a hatred of men. And the men with all the shaved heads. Are there that many guys who are going bald now? With so many balding men desperately trying to save what they have, or miraculously grow back what they’ve lost, why do so many even young males just shave it all off completely? Again, even forty years ago, that shaved head look advertised potential criminality. Think Lex Luthor.
I guess I sound superficial. Maybe I am, but for those of us who lived in another era, when this mass unattractiveness didn’t exist, and where people at least attempted to look halfway decent when they left their house, it’s a huge culture shock. I know from being an overweight child just how hard it is to resist fattening food, but things have really gotten out of hand now. I can’t remember the last time I was in a crowd, where there were more non-fat people than fat people. Virtually every guy has some kind of gut on him, and even the more attractive young girls are at least twenty pounds heavier than they were a generation ago.
And I don’t want to leave out the oldsters. The older generation now is too frequently entitled, as they cut in line and demand the best service at restaurants while tipping the least. Today I saw a kind woman jump to her feet, and hold open the door for an elderly couple. The elderly woman was using a walker, as an alarming number of Americans now are, and neither she nor her husband even glanced at the good samaritan, let alone thanked her. That’s just mind-boggling to me, and reflects the lack of courtesy and civility we see all around us in today’s America. Thank goodness I don’t go to the likes of Walmart, where obese, sometimes half-clothed patrons buzz about the store in motorized carts.
I don’t want America to turn into a Third World country, but our leaders are doing everything they can to make that happen. And the masses they’ve brainwashed into obeying their consistently counterproductive rules and laws, are now starting to really look the part of hopeless, unthinking, uncaring sheeple.
Sarah Jeong, a new member of the New York Times editorial board, came under fire from right-wing outlets recently for her Twitter history. On July 14, 2014, Jeong tweeted, “oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.” On November 28, 2014, she wrote, “Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.” And on December 23, 2014, she festively proclaimed, “Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins.” These are just a few examples of Jeong’s ugly history of anti-white tweets.
Predictably, the New York Times doubled down in defense of Jeong, and remained steadfastly committed to hiring her. Black conservative Candace Owens tweeted out Jeong;s controversial posts, word for word, simply changing every “white” to “black,” and was immediately suspended from Twitter. There’s a pretty obvious point there, but it will be lost on today’s establishment “left.”
In fact, few “liberals” consider Jeong’s tweets racist. The incredible explanation has been devised that she was actually the victim here, and was merely responding to the taunts of true “racists,” who were, of course, lily white. Establishment liberals have long maintained that it’s impossible for nonwhites to be racist.
I was born a white male. I had nothing to do with that, just as none of us have anything to do with our race or our gender. I’m not proud of being white, but I’m not ashamed of it, either. I don’t suffer from “white guilt,” because I’ve always treated all people as decently as I could.
We live in a society so twisted that my lack of shame over my skin color will be considered controversial. If I’d been born black, I’d probably feel differently. I certainly would be about as radical a black as the world has ever seen, but hopefully I’d see beyond race and embrace the big picture.
I realize that, by writing this, I may alienate even more people. But I’m confident it will be mostly white people who take offense. A lot of whites are really good at being offended these days, almost as good as they are at feeling guilty about something only a small fraction of their ancestors were ever associated with.
Just as a century’s worth of Jim Crow nonsense was bound to “explode,” as Langston Hughes so cogently warned us, decades of Affirmative Action, Black History Month, and nonstop bashing of whites will eventually “explode” as well. I think. It’s quite possible that today’s white people are so dumbed down, brainwashed, and “cucked,” to use a favorite new alt-right term, that they may indeed be incapable of ever standing up from their perpetual bent-over postures.
As I have noted many times before, if you’re still concerned about the slavery that once existed in America, you really ought to open your eyes to the horrific reality that today there are some 40 million slaves around the world. India, which is increasingly taking over the IT industry, and lowering wages in the process thanks to the deadly H-1B Visa program, has 10 million of those slaves. Where are the angry social justice warriors to demand an embargo of India?
Just recently, the United Nations accused this country of “racial terrorism” against black people, and recommended reparations for them. No one has accused this country’s leaders of more crimes than I have, but the tyranny they inflict daily upon the people isn’t race specific. And there are no black people living today who were enslaved, just as there are no whites alive who ever enslaved their ancestors. Why doesn’t the wise old adage about “the sins of the father” being visited upon the sons apply here? How about a Year of Jubilee instead, which would benefit the mass of humanity, of all colors and genders, who are suffering under this monstrous disparity of wealth?
All of our racial discord comes from the rampant stupidity of our leaders, especially the white ones. Something about treating everyone equally, and forging a color- blind society, has always eluded them. They honestly seem to feel that tearing down a confederate statue, or getting some usually lowly-paid white working stiff fired from his job, will benefit black people. It’s their way of fighting “racism,” which they are increasingly finding everywhere.
In recent years, we’ve been lectured about brown paper bags, or band-aids, being “racist.” And the people alleging this weren’t being satirical. But what is more disturbing is the response from white people to these ridiculous charges. Total silence. No one is pointing out that this emperor, like all the others in our mad modern world, is totally, stark naked. They merely bustle along with their heads down, and hope that no one points an accusing finger at them.
While Martin Luther King spoke of judging people by the content of their character, no one in America today wants to do that. In a fair society, there would be no “race” selection on any business or government form, outside perhaps of the census. The only thing such a selection can do is to create some kind of discrimination. While “liberals” today claim to hate discrimination, they discriminate nonstop against those they hate, and they hate a lot of people. Perhaps they should recall real liberal Bob Dylan’s comedic line about not letting “Barry Goldwater move in next door and marry my daughter.”
Bob Dylan also wisely counseled us that poor whites are merely a “Pawn in Their Game.” Today’s liberals, many of whom were once probably Dylan fans, would advocate firing and even imprisoning those poor whites if they could be proven guilty of uttering “racist” comments. That’s today’s Left for you; uncover the “racism” that is apparently latent in all white people everywhere, and cause their lives to be destroyed in the process. Black people will somehow “overcome” because of that.
At this point, America should not still be talking about the same things we talked about in the 1960s. Numerous civil rights laws have been passed. School integration should have assured that all children are getting the same (generally subpar) education. Very, very few whites today are “racist.” Blacks are no better or worse, by virtue of their skin color, than anyone else.
“White privilege” exists, but it’s the privilege of power, not of race. Most of our leaders are undeniably white, as well as undeniably corrupt. Liberals today appear to actually believe that the poorest people in America, the whites in Appalachia, have some kind of “privilege” that Oprah Winfrey, Barack Obama and countless other black One Percenters don’t have.
White college professors want to eradicate “whiteness.” Courses exist in which the primary focus of the curriculum is an intense hatred of white people. Michael Moore writes a book titled “Stupid White Men.” Moore is a white man, stupid or not. I often marvel at these self-hating social justice warriors, whose words condemn their own parents, siblings, children and ancestors. They really should walk the walk, and give everything they have to some non-white who doesn’t have their “privilege.”
Laws should apply equally to everyone, regardless of ethnicity, gender, income, or anything else. Rules and standards of conduct, and general expectations, should be the same across the board. Affirmative Action, race norming of tests, is just as discriminatory as separate bathrooms once were. The Old Boy Network was odious, and still exists in some form in lots of places, but the social justice warrior system is just as unfair, because it’s not based on any kind of merit or fairness.
Identity politics, and racial politics in particular, are a distraction from the very real class war that has been going on for a very long time, which is the subject of my book Survival of the Richest. Allowing black workers to get away with things that white workers are routinely fired for does nothing to advance civil rights, and creates more prejudice within those who are victimized by it.
When we hear the media or politicians talk about having a “dialogue” about race, we know what they mean. This “dialogue” will consist of angry black people accusing whites everywhere of “racism,” with perhaps a token submissive white on board, to look suitably guilty. Whites have become experts at apologizing for things they never did, or had any control over, or for simply expressing an unpopular opinion. And they’ve been asked to apologize a lot. A whole lot. What is lost on these anxious apologizers is that the apologies don’t pacify those asking for them. They still get fired, their careers are still ruined, and they still get called “racist.”
I won’t say I have friends who are black. That would be one of the million or so examples of “racism,” according to today’s Left. I have, however, worked with and socialized with hundreds of black people over the decades. I’ve always spoken my mind around them, which they, naturally enough, seem to appreciate. No black has ever called me a racist. Frankly, I think they admire the few white people who don’t act condescending towards them.
When we have reached the point where simply saying “all lives matter” is “racist,” all debate on the subject of race is impossible. You can’t solve a problem when all parties involved are not permitted to give their input. Racial relations won’t improve by one racial group accusing another group of “racism” over and over again, without the accused group having the right (or really the willingness) to defend themselves. It’s tantamount to a continuous rigged trial, where there is no defense attorney, and the sentences meted out are forced apologies and ruination of careers.
Our civilization has embraced the culture of ignorance and violence which naturally festers in the pockets of poverty we find in most of our big cities. The entertainment world, the fashion world, the political world, and obviously the sports world have permitted ghetto culture to not merely seep in, but in the cases of sports and entertainment, to completely dominate. The pigeon English-style of slang that rules ghetto culture has been christened respectfully as Ebonics. Recently, it has been suggested that proper grammar itself is “racist.”
No one is speaking up more for the rights of the poor and dispossessed than me. I wrote Survival of the Richest to expose the sinful disparity of wealth in America, and it does indeed impact blacks significantly, who are disproportionately in the lower income levels. But the unequal distribution of wealth isn’t “racist,” it’s class warfare, being waged by the rich against the poor and what’s left of the middle class. The victims of this class war are all colors, creeds, ages and genders.
John F. Kennedy, during the struggle for real equality in the early 1960s, put things eloquently when he declared, “Race has no place in American life or law.” It doesn’t get any simpler than that. As my favorite (and he happens to be black) character on The Walking Dead says, “All life is precious.”
Donald Trump won back some supporters with his bold diplomatic moves with Russia yesterday. Seeking peace is never a popular move with those who run our civilization, as could be seen by the hysterical opposition he garnered, with even more irrational hatred than usual, from every pillar of the establishment.
The code words were everywhere on social media; Trump was consistently called a “traitor,” and “Putin’s bitch.” Alleged “journalists” dropped their facade further than they ever had; former CIA intern Anderson Cooper declared, “You’ve just seen the most disgraceful performance by a U.S. president.” #TreasonSummit was all the rage on twitter.
My colleagues in the JFK assassination research community were mostly apoplectic over the summit. Laughably, they insisted it was “treason” for Trump to seemingly side with Vladimir Putin over his own intelligence agencies. Yes, these are the same researchers who are quite aware of just how extensively these same intelligence agencies have covered up the truth about the assassination for decades. They are relegated to cheering on the likes of war lover extraordinaire John McCainiac and former President George W. Bush, who both of course opposed the summit.
McCainiac, still clinging to life and still possessing the strength to issue more pro-war soundbites, used another popular keyword, “disgraceful,” calling it “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory.” Former CIA director John Brennan claimed it was “nothing short of treasonous.” Neocon veteran Newt Gingrich said it was “the most serious mistake of his presidency.”
Deluded Republican Never Trump Jeff Flake declared, “I never thought I would see the day when our American President would stand on the stage with the Russian President and place blame on the United States for Russian aggression.” Exactly what “aggression” he was talking about wasn’t specified. Flake, like all neocons, supports America’s quite real, continuous aggression all over the globe. Ayn Rand disciple Paul Ryan lectured Trump that “the president must appreciate that Russia is not our ally.” Another Republican, Senator Bob Corker, ominously stated that this was not “a good moment for our country.” Mitt Romney joined the chorus of those calling the summit “disgraceful.”
Exactly what are all these critics- from all across the phony “left” and “right” spectrum, so upset about? Was Trump scheming to turn over the reigns of government to Putin? Was he advocating Russian as the new American language? Was he promising massive amounts of foreign aid to Russia?
I watched the Trump-Putin press conference. Aside from Trump’s predictable lapses into mindless, juvenile boasting and off-the-cuff embarrassing articulation, both of them sounded reasonable and refreshingly sane. If this had been Obama or Clinton on the stage, with any of China’s totalitarian rulers, the same kept press and deluded celebrities would have been just as over-the-top in their effusive praise.
What critics are seemingly saying here is that Russia is our “enemy,” as the likes of certifiably insane Keith Olbermann screamed on air last year. Another celebrity who is fortunate to be outside a padded room, comedian Chelsea Handler, described with her typical classiness, how Trump was “blowing his boyfriend.” This was a sub- theme in all the criticism; Trump had been taken to the cleaners by Putin, and was a “traitor” for simply talking to him. The inevitable comparisons to Hitler were there; while Trump has been compared to Hitler himself, this time it was Putin as the ultimate bogeyman, and Trump in the role of hapless “appeaser” Neville Chamberlain.
Young actor Chris Evans, who plays Captain America among other things, figuratively screamed on twitter, “This moron, puppet, coward sided with Putin over our own intelligence agencies!” Yes, Chris, the same perpetually corrupt agencies that now have script approval over anything that comes out of Hollywood. Evans, like many, also questioned, “Where are you GOP?” He was seemingly unaware that every high profile member of the GOP blasted Trump, as they have whenever he’s taken a step towards sanity or reform.
Piper Perabo, an actress best known for playing a CIA agent, breathlessly tweeted, “The President works for the American people, right?” Judd Apatow demanded that Fox News- which contrary to his contention was just as transparently appalled by the summit as CNN or MSNBC- not “collude with Trump.” Apparently, Apatow didn’t hear Fox’s Neil Cavuto call the summit “disgusting.”
“Collusion” is the main code word in all this. It has set off the establishment “left” much as words like “commie,” “pinko” and “fellow traveler” once set off the “right” back in the 1950s. The only ostensible reason that Vladimir Putin is so despised is because the mainstream media has relentlessly pushed the theme that Russia “colluded” to steal the election away from the humble and lovable Hillary Clinton. Who was frothing at the mouth for war with Russia, of course.
Former FBI Director James Comey, another unlikely hero of today’s “left,” tweeted out, “This was the day an American president stood on foreign soil next to a murderous lying thug and refused to back his own country.” Comey, like every other triggered, hysterical public figure, refused to elaborate on just how Putin is “lying” or a “murderous thug.” I’m sure he’s cool with our drones killing American citizens who weren’t even charged with a crime, and our nonstop invasion and bombing of small countries all over the world, which have resulted in untold numbers of dead civilians. Some might even call that a “murderous” policy.
My laughable United States Senator, former car dealer Don Beyer, called Trump’s performance “the most astonishing display of weakness and submission that I have ever seen from an American President.” This theme of Trump’s “weakness” suggests to the layman that his critics want him to confront Putin personally. Would they applaud Trump if he’d punched Putin in the nose? Clearly, they are in favor of going to war with this latest “murderous thug” who undoubtedly “hates our freedom.” Democrat swamp veterans Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi both stressed yet another absurd theme; that Trump’s “cowardly” bowing to Putin suggest the Russian president has some incriminating information on him.
Another code word which has been associated with the thoroughly demonized Senator Joseph McCarthy for my entire lifetime- “un-American,” has also been thrown around repeatedly by today’s “left.” There is not the slightest sense of irony in their pronouncements that Trump is “un-American” for seeking detente with Russia. Picture Frank Church and other liberals of the 1970s calling Jimmy Carter “un-American” for sitting down with Leonid Brezhnev.
Trump himself unleashed a typical tweet: “Our relationship with Russia has NEVER been worse thanks to many years of U.S. foolishness and stupidity and now, the Rigged Witch Hunt!” With his patented eloquence, Trump was making the point I’ve been trying to make; this has been a witch hunt, and it has been rigged. The totally corrupt swamp has succeeded in converting the very real, documented fraud perpetrated by the DNC, to rob Bernie Sanders of the party nomination, into a Hollywoodian fantasy where “Russians” robbed the true beneficiary of that fraud, Hillary Clinton, of the presidency.
At least a few prominent people reacted favorably to Trump’s effort at diplomacy rather than confrontation. Both Ron Paul and his son, Senator Rand Paul, supported the president. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer nearly jumped through the screen in a desperate attempt to get Senator Paul to denounce Trump like all the other Republicans. And my friend, former Rep. Cynthia McKinney, wrote on Facebook, “I hope Trump is undeterred by the nattering naybobs of negativism. I’m shocked at all of these Black warmongers being trotted out on TV to spout the talking points they’ve been given. Notice, all criticism are exactly the same, Dem & Repub.” I particularly loved the use of Pat Buchanan’s old “naybobs” quote. Like Buchanan, Cynthia McKinney doesn’t play into the phony “left” and “right” paradigm.
Trump’s statement, “I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace, than to risk peace in pursuit of politics” rekindled memories of some of his anti- establishment 2016 campaign rhetoric. Knowing Trump, he’ll follow this with another bombing of Syria. After all, this peace summit followed one of his dumbest moves to date; the nomination of the man who covered up Vince Foster’s death, Brett Kavanaugh, to the Supreme Court.
But it’s been a good week for Trump. Before the summit, he enraged “leftists” again by refusing to bow to the Queen of England, and in his patented style walking in front of her in what we are told is beyond the pale behavior. The same “left” that wants war with Russia, and calls those who don’t “un-American” and “traitors,” believes that the ultimate One Percenter, a relic of the dark ages, deserves tremendous respect because she has been declared “royalty.”
We fought a war of independence to shatter this notion that one’s bloodlines grant one a special authority, and untold, unearned wealth and perks. But in today’s cockeyed, crumbling America, the royals are worshiped by those who despise a leader who has banned GMOs and threatened any Rothschilds who enter his country with arrest. Putin is a “murderous thug” but “Uncle Joe” Stalin, who presided over perhaps the most diabolical regime in modern history, was our ally.
Monty Python once joked, “In 1945, peace broke out.” Clearly, a large number of Americans don’t want peace to break out. Ever. They are addicted to the same tired propaganda that has been regurgitated by generations of establishment “journalists” since the Spanish-American War of 1898. They killed JFK because he advocated peace. As Benjamin Franklin said, “There is no such thing as a good war, or a bad peace.”
Today Americans will celebrate Independence Day. There will be fireworks, and cookouts, and hot dog eating contests. The Sci-Fi Channel will probably run their usual Twilight Zone marathon. The alleged “History” Channel will almost certainly waste air space with absurd shows like American Pickers.
There will be little mention anywhere about the War for Independence, our revolt against England. There’s a good reason for this; no politician, and no mainstream “journalist” wants to focus any attention on how this country was born. That’s the last thing a corrupt ruling elite wants to do; remind those they rule over that their ancestors violently overthrew a much less powerful tyranny.
In my upcoming book, Crimes and Cover-Ups in American Politics: 1776-1963, I’ll examine some “hidden history” of our Founders and their revolution. Things like the shameful treatment of Thomas Paine, the forgotten Shays and Whiskey Rebellions, the human skeletons found in Benjamin Franklin’s home, and the ongoing disinformation campaign to transform the most enlightened man of his age, Thomas Jefferson, into a despicable “racist.”
I have remarked before on the curious phenomenon of Hollywood ignoring the Founding Fathers. Even during the Golden Age of Hollywood, not a single picture was made about George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, John or Samuel Adams, or John Hancock. In fact, the film colony tended to mention the American Revolution itself only sparingly. Again, there was an obvious reason for that; those in charge don’t want to mention anything about the forcible removal of a previous, much less rotten bunch of rulers.
Instead, over the course of time, American “patriotism” has been converted into a ghoulish worship of state power, exemplified by the finger-pointing “Uncle Sam” figure. Modern Americans adore the flag, but not the Constitutional system of checks and balances. And certainly not the Bill of Rights. No one seems to like them.
This all happened gradually. The senseless War Between the States, known popularly as the Civil War by the northern victors, consolidated power in the central government, and permitted the first imperial presidency. Lincoln’s persistent unconstitutional actions, and the failure to recognize them as such, paved the way for the countless future transgressions against the Constitution, and the civil liberties of the people.
By the time World War I rolled around, “Uncle Sam” posters propped up everywhere. The growing power of the establishment press, combined with the blossoming film world, created lovable dough boys and whipped up hatred against the dirty “Krauts,” the dreaded “Hun.” Opponents of the pointless conflict were thrown into prison, including the noted socialist Eugene Debs. This was not merely a renewal of John Adams’ Alien and Sedition Acts, but overt approval of the precedent Lincoln set with his diabolical roundup and illegal imprisonment of his political opponents.
The word “patriot” originally meant a revolutionary, a colonist who supported the fight for independence from Great Britain. By now, it has become solidified in the public mind as someone who flies and salutes the flag proudly, supports our brave military and thanks the troops regularly for their “service.”
The original radical revolutionaries, the Sons of Liberty, would be aghast at mindless, modern American patriotism. The colonists wanted free and independent states, with a central government that had very limited power. No Founding Father outside of Alexander Hamilton- the central banking devotee who is so beloved now by our culture- would support our overreaching federal government, fueled by politically correct authoritarianism.
It’s an indictment of American gullibility that a play glorifying the only Founding Father who loved debt and the banking racket, Alexander Hamilton, has become a popular Broadway smash. Not only that, but he’s not a dead white male, like all the other Founders. He’s black and hip, and a talented rapper. It’s a certainty that virtually none of the almost exclusively white audiences for the play know the least bit about the real history of Hamilton, let alone the real history of our founding. I would venture that a good portion of them believe Hamilton really was black.
It was probably predictable that July 4th celebrations would revolve around fireworks, and flag worship, instead of liberty and unalienable rights. No one remembers the Declaration of Independence any more, and that’s a good thing for our leaders. Just reading about a formal protest against finely detailed acts of tyranny, might give even our comatose sheeple reason to pause. Instead, there are always choruses of “USA! USA!” to guide them in the proper direction.
The reality is, if Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry and their brethren were alive today, they would not be Democrats or Republicans. They would be political “extremists” shunned by the mainstream establishment. They might even be smeared as “conspiracy theorists.” Few nations have ever had such a historical dichotomy; those who fought for our independence, and who were revered as heroes for most of this country’s history, are anathema to our present-day leaders. They are collectively Those Who Cannot be Mentioned.
Well, they can be mentioned negatively, of course. All except for the hip, black bankers’ favorite Hamilton are routinely denigrated as “racists.” They probably were all chauvinists as well, although there is little historical evidence of any feminists running amuck in the British colonies. Certainly no transgenders were around.
As I’ve noted before, most Americans are historically illiterate. And we are very, very close to having history itself declared “racist.” After all, virtually everything else is. Recently, some typical social justice warriors proclaimed that civility is a construct of “white supremacy.” We have already been advised that proper grammar is “racist.” But Americans, asleep and distracted as they are nowadays, seem perfectly content to accept that politeness and civility are in fact “racist.”
The Founding Fathers weren’t perfect. But they created a system of government that is as close to perfection as anything yet devised by human beings. The fact that corrupt forces have controlled this system for far too long doesn’t detract from the nature of the system itself. The Bill of Rights should be treasured by every American. Instead, I firmly believe that a national referendum on it would go down to defeat, especially if enough vacuous celebrities spoke out against it. Almost no one supports Patrick Henry’s timeless notion that “I may not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to my dying day your right to say it.”
I’m sorry to rain on everyone’s Fourth of July parade. I just can’t be patriotic, when that term has been co-opted into being an unthinking supporter of the state. A state which is thoroughly and hopelessly corrupt. A real American patriot supports the ideals of human liberty and unalienable rights.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the present political climate is the general acceptance, by a huge number of Americans, that Russia and/or Vladimir Putin “colluded” to rig the 2016 presidential election for Donald Trump. I don’t dismiss any “conspiracy theory,” because most of them are borne out of our systemic corruption.
However, the Russian “collusion” conspiracy theory is so absurd, so absent any evidence, so contrary to any rational notion of common sense, that it must be confronted for what it is. It is state propaganda, one of the few “conspiracy theories” ever devised by and for the state, and not in opposition to it. It has been swallowed by many otherwise astute leftists, simply because of the abject hatred they feel for Donald Trump. Because of this visceral enmity, they have become willing to believe anything negative about him, with the obvious hope that something, anything, will make him go away and disappear back into the recesses of the One Percent.
The “collusion” theory is based upon the very real, very provable campaign on the part of the Democratic National Committee to deny Bernie Sanders, the clear favorite of primary voters, the party’s nomination. All of this was documented via internal party memos released by Julian Assange and Wikileaks. Somehow, this has been twisted completely around, so that the actual villains here- the DNC and the corrupt candidate (Hillary Clinton) they “colluded” for, have become victims.
Donald Trump, meanwhile, protested the DNC’s “collusion” for Clinton and against Sanders a lot more vocally than Sanders- the actual victim here- ever did. Sanders, in fact, has now publicly supported the ridiculous Russian “collusion” scenario himself! It’s hard to imagine a more concrete example of the theatrical and insincere nature of American politics. And yet, through nonstop promotion by the mainstream media, DNC collusion has become Russian collusion, and the beneficiary has been changed from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump.
In my book Hidden History, I featured an entire section on voting fraud in America. The late Collier brothers documented this thoroughly decades ago in their book Votescam. The same “journalists” who have ignored the real and troubling evidence of voter fraud, perpetrated by home grown authorities and not Russians- are the loudest voices shouting that American voters were “robbed” by the dastardly Russians. Even if this were true- which it demonstrably is not- understand that they are irate that voters were “robbed” of a President Hillary Clinton.
There was even a high-profile unnatural death associated with the DNC’s corrupt theft of its nomination from Sanders. Seth Rich, a young DNC staffer, was all but explicitly named by Julian Assange as the individual who leaked the information exposing DNC- not Russian- subterfuge. Rich was gunned down in Washington, D.C. by a still unknown assailant or assailants. He was not robbed, and there have been a host of curious questions raised about his death. Of course, all of these questions were raised by “conspiracy theorists,” not professional journalists.
When Sean Hannity- of all people- conducted an extremely rare investigative report on the Rich murder, there was a nuclear response from the establishment. Fox News summarily apologized, and Seth Rich’s family threatened to sue the network for…I suppose trying to seek the truth about their son’s murder.
It has been sad or hilarious, depending upon one’s perspective, to watch the left’s reaction to this Russian “collusion” fantasy. Keith Olbermann, former ESPN wannabe comedian turned serious “journalist,” has become truly apoplectic, even mentally unstable over the story. In one deranged rant last year, he shouted about how America is “at war” with the Russians. While this country has been at war perpetually for most of its existence, we have never yet been at war with the Russians. Evidently, Olbermann and his ilk really, really want that.
Up until Vladimir Putin rose to power in Russia, the establishment left collectively held a very different attitude. During the reign of the Soviet Union, when Russia undeniably took over many different sovereign nations and swallowed territory as greedily as the Nazis, these same leftists would have been distraught at any notion of an armed conflict with them. They supported cooperation and detente. This was a wise attitude, in my view. So why, at this point in time, when the Soviet Union has long been dismantled, and Russia is struggling to become a more democratic country, are they such a threat to America, and the world?
Donald Trump has been lambasted for simply saying we should try to get along with Russia. He was raked over the coals by some good people for advocating that Russia be allowed back into the G-7 summit. The left has even taken on the mantle of those they have long demonized, with their own guilt-by-association tactics. I honestly think the majority of mainstream “liberals” today would fully support a new Un-American Activities Committee, as long as it was geared towards rooting out “Russian” influence in our government, and ultimately removing Trump from office.
I have seen the word “traitor” thrown around cavalierly, directed at Trump because of this imaginary, entirely fictional Russian “collusion” story. These same leftists would have blanched at anyone, anywhere, calling Barack Obama a “traitor” for any reason. They probably would have instinctively responded with cries of “racism.”
All of this is not a defense of Donald Trump. I shouldn’t have to stipulate that, but it is necessary in today’s fractured political climate. Trump is many things; arrogant and juvenile beyond caricature, crude and superficial, to name just a few. But he is not a Russian “agent.” He was not elected because the Russians somehow magically “hacked” the election. Why he was permitted to be elected, by our corrupt masters, is a legitimate question to ask. But it is our own corrupt elite that control the polls in this country; not Vladimir Putin and the Russians.
Donald Trump has become not only the biggest lightning rod this country has ever seen, he has become the conduit through which all information about any political issue must travel. Every issue now is impacted by how one views Trump. Those supporters who irrationally cling to fantasies that he’s playing some kind of super chess not comprehended by mere mortals are willing to applaud anything he says or does, no matter how much it contradicts his campaign rhetoric.
Those who hate Trump, however- and he generates more hate than any human being ever has in this country outside of Adolph Hitler- are just as willing to believe any charge leveled against him, regardless of evidence. Trump is the dividing line in the American body politic now. His presidency is creating a stronger, but just as phony partisanship between the devotees of what Huey Long called HiPapaLowem and LowPapaHighem. He is like Goldstein in Orwell’s 1984; generating far more than any two minutes of hate, and representing to others what is at best loyal opposition, and at worst perhaps something just as imaginary as Orwell’s character.
Donald Trump should be soundly criticized for allowing his entire administration to be overrun with the swamp creatures he promised to “drain.” He should be blasted for failing to keep his countless campaign promises. But attributing our very own, domestic voter fraud to imaginary “Russians” is a convenient way to avoid confronting just one aspect of our massive corruption. Donald Trump may be controlled by dark forces, but whoever is pulling his strings, it’s not “Russia.”
On the morning of June 5, 1968, I awoke and immediately yelled out to my father, “Dad, did Bobby Kennedy win the California primary?” He replied, “Yeah, but he was shot.” I was eleven years old, and already keenly interested in politics. I’d been rooting hard for RFK to win, even though I was obviously too young to vote.
In Miss Mitchell’s sixth grade class, they brought a television set in and we all watched the nonstop coverage of the tragic event. It was clear there was no hope for RFK; he was not going to survive. I watched the film clips of recent interviews with the candidate who was now clinging to life, and his final words to the crowd, of “Now it’s on to Chicago, and let’s win there” haunted me then, as they do now.
In many ways, Robert F. Kennedy’s doomed 1968 presidential run was “the last campaign,” as John Stewart titled his heart-wrenching song. There was a sense that whatever vestiges of idealism, of Peace Corps-style hope for the future that remained after Dallas, died with RFK the following day, on June 6, 1968. Never again would we see any presidential candidate emphasize the horror of poverty. Never again would we see any leader declare so simply that we could, and should, be doing better.
During that wretchedly long school day, some kids were joking and even appeared happy that RFK had been shot. I felt a despondency I never had in my young life, outside of the times my parents had been sick. This was a concern I’m sure I shared with millions of others across the country, and the world, who were not a part of the Kennedy family.
I was still following updates on RFK’s hopeless condition on my transistor radio, naively praying and clinging desperately to the notion that he might somehow survive, and even continue his campaign. Later that night I heard Frank Mankiewicz’s solemn words “Robert Francis Kennedy died…he was forty two years old” complete with the typical crackles and pops, as I was brooding alone in our unfinished basement.
I remained immersed in the coverage of the funeral train, with all the people lined up to watch and salute it. Andy Williams sang the slowest version of Battle Hymn of the Republic I’d ever heard, but somehow it fit the occasion. And Ted Kennedy delivered what is still the most moving eulogy I’ve ever heard. “Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not.” RFK was also perhaps the most poetic politician of modern times, so this eloquent quote was altogether fitting.
Fifty years later, we see the mainstream media doing what they do best; obfuscating and distorting the record about Kennedy’s life, and especially his death. It was a pleasant surprise to see Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. come out strongly against the official narrative that Sirhan Sirhan had acted alone in killing his father. He even rekindled memories of Dexter King and James Earl Ray when he visited Sirhan in prison. His sister Kathleen Kennedy Townsend followed suit and also called for a new investigation. More properly, of course, we should have an investigation. You can’t have a new investigation if something was never investigated to begin with.
I covered the RFK assassination extensively in Hidden History. The LAPD, FBI, and other investigatory government agencies never attempted to follow the intriguing leads they had. The girl in the polka-dot dress disappeared into the same memory hole that JFK assassination figures the Babushka Lady and Umbrella Man had.
We know that there were too many bullet holes, and too many injured bystanders, for all the shots to have come from Sirhan’s gun, which could only fire eight shots. One of the victims, Paul Schrade, became a high-profile critic of the official story, and put it best when he said of his own wound: “The only way I could have been hit by that bullet was if I was nine feet tall or had my head on Kennedy’s shoulder.”
Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg, Sylvia Meaher, Vincent Salandria and other private citizens had been the ones to expose the absurdity of the Warren Report, because no professional reporters would do any investigating. In the assassination of RFK, it was the same story. Despite RFK’s close ties with many in the Washington, D.C. press corps, it was left to people like Lillian Castellano and Floyd B. Nelson to ask the questions highly-paid journalists wouldn’t.
Watching just one of the specials commemorating Robert F. Kennedy fifty years after his death, I was astounded to see some of his children commenting alongside the likes of Dan Rather. Rather’s only connection to any Kennedy is his persistent lying about their deaths, especially the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It wasn’t quite as bad as Caroline Kennedy presenting a Profiles in Courage award to Gerald Ford, who helped cover up her father’s death on the Warren Commission, but it was inappropriate and frankly ridiculous to include Rather’s remembrances.
A great deal of crucial evidence was lost or destroyed in this case, as has happened in most high-profile cases over the past fifty years. We know from coroner Thomas Noguchi’s simple finding that the fatal bullet entered RFK from behind at basically point blank range, that it couldn’t have been fired by Sirhan, who according to all witnesses was never in front of Kennedy and nowhere near close enough to him at any time to have fired a shot that left powder burns.
I don’t expect to see any television specials focusing on the glaring flaws in the official findings of RFK’s assassination. No “second gun” talk. No interview of Thane Eugene Cesar. No interview with Scott Enyart, who was a teenager taking perhaps significant photos in the pantry that night, which still haven’t been returned to him fifty years later. Instead, there will be emotional tributes to the man, lauding him for being concerned with civil rights, with maybe a few words about his opposition to the war in Vietnam.
There will certainly be nothing said in the mainstream media about the connections between the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers. As I’ve grown fond of saying, if JFK hadn’t been assassinated, neither would RFK. Jim Garrison, Mark Lane, and others have acknowledged that, behind the scenes, RFK was planning to reopen the investigation into his brother’s death. This was explored in great detail in David Talbot’s book Brothers.
RFK was one of the last politicians to make this country’s shameful poverty a campaign issue. Only the Kennedys have visited the poorest of the poor Americans, in Appalachia. He had a great deal more empathy than most One Percenters do. Robert F. Kennedy would be appalled by present-day America, with its Ayn Rand worship/looking out for number one/near absence of empathy for others. No more “There but for the grace of God go I.”
RFK’s class and humility would also be out of step with today’s burgeoning Idiocracy. He was perhaps the last chance for Americans to rescue the very real optimism and idealism of a mythical Camelot. An honest investigation led by RFK into the JFK assassination would have blasted away the brewing cynicism of the young, and assured that future state crimes would be harder to carry out and even harder to conceal. An RFK presidency would have saved countless lives that were subsequently lost in Vietnam. The misdeeds of the CIA and FBI would probably have been exposed years before they were by the Church Committee.
This timeless quote from Robert F. Kennedy inspired me when I first heard it, and indeed it continues to inspire me as I try, in my small way, to heed his words: “Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.”
I believe that the growing disparity of wealth in America, and around the world, would not be so glaring if RFK had been elected president. If he was concerned about poverty in his era, what would he think of America in 2018, with half of its population making less than $27,000 per year, and possessing less than 1% of the collective wealth? What would he have thought of deadly trickle-down economics, which led us down this disastrous path?
Who knows- perhaps Robert F. Kennedy would have devolved into a typical modern- day mainstream leftist/social justice warrior, addicted to identity politics. I prefer to remember him as he was; brushing a strand of his boyish hair from his face, gesturing in that Kennedy style, as he headed for his own rendezvous with destiny.