An American Future

Very well said. especially by an Ohioan. 8>) Just kidding my family is from Ohio and neighboring Pennsylvania.

Thanks!

Not happy with it yet, but think this is a little better than the Saturday version.

How Can Any American?

How can any American support anyone, running for President, who does not respect the stated purpose of the Constitution, she has repeatedly sworn to preserve? The Preamble to the Constitution states that purpose:

We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Our "posterity," of course, are our lineal descendants. A purpose that is 100% consistent with Donald Trump's call to put America First. It is 100% consistent with the Fifth Commandment, and traditional Western values, in general. Mrs. Clinton's call for open borders, and the failure to properly vet immigrants from lands with very different value systems, is 100% inconsistent with the Constitutional purpose.

How can any American refuse to vote for Donald Trump, who not only understands & accepts what the Constitution requires. He strenuously exposes Mrs. Clinton on issue after issue!

Trump is willing to risk a lifetime of success--his whole career & fortune--to take on a corrupt media, that tries in every unfair, intellectually dishonest, way to cover up Mrs. Clinton's crimes and repeated acts of betrayal, in order to stand for us, our Constitution and our clear interests, on a host of vital issues. Consider:

1. Trump supports and has been endorsed by the border guards. Mrs. Clinton has shown only disdain for those trying to keep America safe from a flood of unauthorized invaders.

2. Trump supports the rights of Americans to efficiently arm themselves, both for their own protection and for the protection of America! Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly sought means to disarm American families.

3. Trump has supported local Police in violent confrontations with neighborhood thugs; while Mrs. Clinton & Obama have allied themselves with virulently anti Police groups--some funded by George Soros--groups determined to deny their law abiding neighbors, the Police protection, necessary to make those neighborhoods safe.

4. Trump understands that making any neighborhood safe, is the key to increasing constructive activity in such neighborhood;--the key to people being able to start local businesses, with some hope of success; the key to better job opportunities, better credit ratings, etc. Mrs. Clinton has shown herself more intent on encouraging and supporting those Soros funded groups.

5. Donald Trump supports all forms of American energy production! He wants to let the coal miners get back to work; to take advantage of improved technology that allows a cleaner use of coal. Mrs. Clinton has insulted the coal miners, by refusing to help them get back to work, while she patronizes them; offering them a new dependence on even more Governmental meddling.

6. Returning to the Constitution--the solemn compact (or contract) that authorizes us to even have a Federal Government;--the charter, that once--when truly honored--made us the envy of the earth:

Donald Trump has pledged to appoint only those who honor the clear intent of that charter, to the Federal Judiciary. Mrs. Clinton has promised to only appoint Judges who agree with her ghoulish view of Feminist issues: such as the idea that it is O.K. for a woman--on mere whim--to have a healthy, already half born baby, killed in cold blood, in something euphemistically labeled a "partial birth abortion!"

7. Donald Trump, daily addresses great rallies, to discuss these and other vital issues; such as the damage to American workers & communities, resulting from trade deals, and immigration policies, that do not protect our rooted population. Mrs. Clinton has avoided in depth discussion of issues; preferring, instead, an incessant attack on Donald Trump's personality; his tone; his supporters;--in each case misrepresenting the same by a combination of lies, cherry picked but misleading data, gross exaggerations, and citations of spurious media smears, engineered by a slavish press, which covers up actual crimes, in a blind, but determined, support for the perpetrator.

Under such circumstances: How can any American vote for Mrs. Clinton? How can any American refuse to vote for Donald Trump?

Note further: There are thousands of organizations, some Faith based (both evangelical & social); some secular, but ideological; some based on Humanist arrogance (Return To Babel). Among them there is something to represent just about any imagined human interest. Our written Constitution is the sole organizational effort focused solely on the interests of the rooted American. How dare any American betray or trivialize our organization; the Constitutional Republic, as it was intended by the Fathers, who won it for their posterity?! How can any American refuse to vote for Donald Trump?

May the living God Bless all those who understand what is truly at stake!

William Flax

Thank you for How Can Any American?.

Your Item 6, second paragraph, is of singular importance, for it addresses the very heart and soul of the "unique idea"* upon which American liberty was formed--that rights are "Creator-endowed," thus, "inalienable."

Hillary Clinton's deeply-held "Progressive" regressive ideology turns the Founders' underlying premise for the written Constitution's protections for life upside down, on the Progressive movement's assumption that some human beings have an extra-Constitutional right to determine who lives and who dies.

The following essay quoted with permission from the Bicentennial (1987) Edition of Our Ageless Constitution discusses the uniquely American Constitutional concept for self-government by "We, the People."

Our Constitution embodied a UNIQUE IDEA. Nothing like it had ever been done before. The power of the idea was in the recognition that people's rights are granted directly by the Creator - not by the state - and that the people, then, and only then, grant rights to government. The concept is so simple, yet so very fundamental and far-reaching.

CREATOR

People

Government

America's founders embraced a previously unheard-of political philosophy which held that people are "...endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain unalienable rights...." This was the statement of guiding principle for the new nation, and, as such, had to be translated into a concrete charter for government. The Constitution of The United States of America became that charter.

Other forms of government, past and present, rely on the state as the grantor of human rights. America's founders, however, believed that a government made up of imperfect people exercising power over other people should possess limited powers. Through their Constitution, they wished to "secure the blessings of liberty" for themselves and for posterity by limiting the powers of government. Through it, they delegated to government only those rights they wanted it to have, holding to themselves all powers not delegated by the Constitution. They even provided the means for controlling those powers they had granted to government.

This was the unique American idea. Many problems we face today result from a departure from this basic concept. Gradually, other "ideas" have influenced legislation which has reversed the roles and given government greater and greater power over individuals. Early generations of Americans pledged their lives to the cause of individual freedom and limited government and warned, over and over again, that eternal vigilance would be required to preserve that freedom for posterity.

Footnote: "Our Ageless Constitution," W. David Stedman & La Vaughn G. Lewis, Editors (Asheboro, NC, W. David Stedman Associates, 1987) Part III: ISBN 0-937047-01-5

An excellent read! Also property rights and agenda 21, and even war with Russia and China should be considered.

When I was in Russia in the 90’s it was at first like a 3rd world country in many ways. Yet the average ten year old spoke perfect English and was working on a 3rd language. Russia and China will beat us without Iran helping them.

A Hillary election is the end as we know it.

Thank you for your contribution #44.

The Obama/Clinton claque of apologetic Americans, undermines our future prospects in a wide variety of ways. The very notion that internationalist flakes will ever keep us safe is almost too absurd to even take as a joke.

Note On Essential Tactics

I do not want to come across as arrogant; but based on 60+ years of fighting for traditional American values, including hours of using live TV to advantage, I want to share some experience driven suggestions, both for our candidate, and all of us who will be actively promoting a Trump victory in just 20 days.

While speaking in anger can sometimes help rally those who share your beliefs and priorities, it is not the most effective way to convert those who dissent from our purpose. When there is a real problem to be addressed, it is almost always better to speak in sorrow than in anger.

In the present ideological conflict, there is great reason for sorrow. We need to interject, in every possible exchange, those contemporary phenomena that are not only unfortunate from our stand point; but which are likely to be understood as sad by anyone listening to us.

Putting this understanding to work in a situation such as tonight's Presidential debate; Trump needs to intertwine his response to essential policy issues, by sadly lamenting the background social climate, which certainly impacts all aspects of contemporary American life, including the problem reflected in the issue. For example:

The decline in pride in heritage, openly encouraged by Obama's repeated apologies to others for America's traditions & achievement--leading to Americans kneeling through the Star Spangled Banner;--his & Mrs. Clinton's siding with Soros financed thugs against the Police--leading to the cold blooded assassination of American cops;--their refusal to protect the border, leading to job losses among rooted Americans, brutal crimes against American women, and the despicable riots in California, where aliens who do not share our values, or honor our heritage, intimidate local officials into not celebrating the achievements of the Founding Fathers and their posterity.

It was only last week, when anti-American culturalists advocated not celebrating Columbus Day! The Obama/Clinton cabal seem intent on denying that our values & achievements, under uniquely American cultural values, grew directly out of the experience driven values of particular European settlers. That is fact. It takes nothing away from the achievements or values of any other people; but it is our fact, and we are entitled to honor that fact and the rich cultural heritage it reflects.

To the extent that the Obama/Clinton cabal would deny us pride in our history, they are truly bigoted enemies. But we do best, again, when we lament the success of our enemies, as we explain, again quietly and sadly, how totally despicable is this ongoing attack, coming indeed from those who have benefited so much, while gaming our system.

Some may think that this approach is going soft. It is precisely the opposite. In place of venting our wrath at the Obama/Clinton betrayal, we begin to instill wrath in some of those who otherwise would simply go along with the enemy, "to get along."

There is nothing the least bit new in these tactics. Anyone familiar with Shakespeare's play "Julius Caesar," is quite familiar with the technique. It worked in the play because it reflects a true understanding of the psychological factors involved.

bump to #48.

Here is another tactical approach:

A Very Confused Candidate

In the Presidential Debate, last night (the 19th of October), Mrs. Clinton explained her approach to job creation. The recital sounded rehearsed & sloganized; but it demonstrated something very differfent than what she obviously intended. It would be far better described as a path to economic stagnation, than a path to economic progress!

That a woman who has been politically active, all her entire adult life, among a people with the most successful history of economic achievement over their first century and a quarter, of any people on earth, under a Constitutional Government designed to protect that people from a bureaucratic pestilence, which has been the bain of most nations; that such a woman has so missed the essential point of the American achievement, is staggering in its implications.

Mrs. Clinton claimed that a Clinton Government woujld rebuild the "Middle Class." Was she tottally unaware that the American Middle Class clearly built itself? That the American Middle Class resulted from naturally energized individuals, aspiring to achieve the good life, who risked everything to first clear a wilderness, work hard, generation to generation, to save & accumulate the attributes of the good life; with the result that by 1913--the year that a graduated income tax first became Constitutional, this Settler built Federation of newly settled States, had already surpassed every one of the great powers of Europe in industrial strength.

To "rebuild" the "Middle Class," Mrs. Clinton vowed to make the most successful Americans--those who had achieved the most-- pay increased taxes; she called it "paying their 'fair' share." But it was clearly to be a tax on success--a tax to fund a raft of new programs (a cancer or pestilence of an expanded bureaucracy). She was obviously indifferent to the fact that the biggest impediment to any poor person with ambition, actually launching a small business to improve his status, is an almost incomprehensible explosion in bureaucratic regulations, most of which premised on the same flawed understanding of how people actually advance, which Mrs. Clinton displayed, last night.

Americans used to learn by experience. What were the experience based lessons of what transpired from the drafting of our written Constitution in 1787, until the passage of the income tax amendment in 1913? Are they instructive or not, for what actually works for human advancement?

The Constitution prior to 1913, absolutely interdicted a tax driven war on the accumulation of individual wealth. Article I, Section 9, which Mrs. Clinton should have remembered from Law School, provided that no direct tax on individual Americans could be applied in any way but pro-capita. (That is Warren Buffet would pay the same tax--not the same percentage tax--but the same tax as Joe the Plumber. The Founders had no desire to limit individual success. They sought only to encourage it.

Under there experience based philosophy, there were almost certainly not even 1% of the bureaucratic regulations, with which Americans seeking to improve their lot, must face today. In place of today's pursuit of grievances, real or imagined, there was universal admiration for the high achievers! And the growth rate of a people freed to achieve, was the economic phenomenon of human history.

We do not pretend to know whether it was in her indoctrination by Marxist Pied Pipers, in her late teens, or pure confusion in whatever she is struggling with today. But Mrs. Clinton is utterly clueless on how a dynamic economy works; as she is utterly unaware of the dynamic, interactive factors, that drive or stagnate any human aspiration or achievement. What is absolutely clear, even if one ignores her lack of a moral compass in her political dealings; the woman is absolutely unqualified to be President of the United States.

This is one more reason why we must win this election for Donald Trump.

William Flax

[This may be reproduced, if in full context, with or without attribution.]

My apology to all; especially all who liked this. There were four typos that have now been corrected, in the earlier postings.

A Very Confused Candidate

In the Presidential Debate, last night (the 19th of October), Mrs. Clinton explained her approach to job creation. The recital sounded rehearsed & sloganized; but it demonstrated something very different than what she obviously intended. It would be far better described as a path to economic stagnation, than a path to economic progress!

That a woman who has been politically active, her entire adult life, among a people with the most successful history of economic achievement over their first century and a quarter, of any people on earth, under a Constitutional Government designed to protect that people from a bureaucratic pestilence, which has been the bane of most nations; that such a woman has so missed the essential point of the American achievement, is staggering in its implications.

Mrs. Clinton claimed that a Clinton Government would rebuild the "Middle Class." Was she totally unaware that the American Middle Class clearly built itself? That the American Middle Class resulted from naturally energized individuals, aspiring to achieve the good life, who risked everything to first clear a wilderness, work hard, generation to generation, to save & accumulate the attributes of the good life; with the result that by 1913--the year that a graduated income tax first became Constitutional, this Settler built Federation of newly settled States, had already surpassed every one of the great powers of Europe in industrial strength.

To "rebuild" the "Middle Class," Mrs. Clinton vowed to make the most successful Americans--those who had achieved the most-- pay increased taxes; she called it "paying their 'fair' share." But it was clearly to be a tax on success--a tax to fund a raft of new programs (a cancer or pestilence of an expanded bureaucracy). She was obviously indifferent to the fact that the biggest impediment to any poor person with ambition, actually launching a small business to improve his status, is an almost incomprehensible explosion in bureaucratic regulations, most of which premised on the same flawed understanding of how people actually advance, which Mrs. Clinton displayed, last night.

Americans used to learn by experience. What were the experience based lessons of what transpired from the drafting of our written Constitution in 1787, until the passage of the income tax amendment in 1913? Are they instructive or not, for what actually works for human advancement?

The Constitution prior to 1913, absolutely interdicted a tax driven war on the accumulation of individual wealth. Article I, Section 9, which Mrs. Clinton should have remembered from Law School, provided that no direct tax on individual Americans could be applied in any way but pro-capita. (That is Warren Buffet would pay the same tax--not the same percentage tax--but the same tax as Joe the Plumber. The Founders had no desire to limit individual success. They sought only to encourage it.

Under there experience based philosophy, there were almost certainly not even 1% of the bureaucratic regulations, with which Americans seeking to improve their lot, must face today. In place of today's pursuit of grievances, real or imagined, there was universal admiration for the high achievers! And the growth rate of a people freed to achieve, was the economic phenomenon of human history.

We do not pretend to know whether it was in her indoctrination by Marxist Pied Pipers, in her late teens, or pure confusion in whatever she is struggling with today. But Mrs. Clinton is utterly clueless on how a dynamic economy works; as she is utterly unaware of the dynamic, interactive factors, that drive or stagnate any human aspiration or achievement. What is absolutely clear, even if one ignores her lack of a moral compass in her political dealings; the woman is absolutely unqualified to be President of the United States.

This is one more reason why we must win this election for Donald Trump.

William Flax

[This may be reproduced, if in full context, with or without attribution.]

Bump: The points made are yet more critical!

Bump Take a look at #51.

Here is an update of #40: