Saturday, November 8, 2025


The left wants to save democracy by destroying it             By Kevin Finn

When was the last time a prominent Democrat politician (other than John Fetterman) said anything remotely factual, or proposed any legislation to make America safer, stronger, more prosperous, or more united? All they have are lies, psychological projection, and logical fallacies. In the last case, they’re especially fond of proof by assertion — unfounded claims stated as if they were true.
Democrats have a new mantra: “We must save democracy from Trump.” This noble-sounding imperative has become a blank check, justifying every excess, every norm-shattering tactic, in a relentless war against one man. Peel back the veneer of moral urgency, and what emerges is not salvation, but sabotage — a calculated demolition of democratic guardrails, all in the name of vengeance. What began as partisan combat has metastasized into a vendetta that now threatens to consume its architects.

Consider the raw hypocrisy in electoral engineering. Democrats decry Republican gerrymandering as an assault on fair representation, yet they’ve carved their own states into grotesque jigsaw puzzles, erasing GOP voices with surgical precision. Massachusetts, where 36% voted for Trump; Connecticut (42%); Maine (46%); New Mexico (46%); New Hampshire (48%); Rhode Island (42%); and Hawaii (38%) boast zero Republican congressional seats. Nationally, Republicans are short 6–10 House seats relative to the popular vote — a disparity Democrats dismiss with a weary sigh: “We’ve already gerrymandered; don’t emulate us.” When slogans like “protect our democracy” echo endlessly from politicians and media, it’s not inspiration; it’s a cover-up for failure.

This erosion seeps into every arena. Democrat leaders now embrace outrage as strategy. Cory Booker erupts in congressional tirades about twice a month; Hakeem Jeffries brandishes a baseball bat; Jasmine Crockett hurls obscenities at Trump. Their new refrain? “We haven’t been tough enough.”

James Carville urges demographic tricks — making states of Puerto Rico and D.C. for four Senate seats — and floats packing the Supreme Court. Had Hillary Clinton won in 2016, they’d have torched the Electoral College via the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. These aren’t hypotheticals; they’re blueprints for a one-party fortress, defended as “necessary” against Trump’s phantom threat.

The playbook is battle-tested. Recall the Russian collusion hoax, orchestrated by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, which nearly derailed Trump’s 2016 campaign, sabotaged his transition, and hobbled his first two years. It spawned two sham impeachments, a Mar-a-Lago raid on a private citizen, ballot purges in 25 states, debanking schemes, and — most chillingly — two assassination attempts during his latest bid. The FBI, CIA, and DOJ, institutions meant to safeguard democracy, morphed into a political inquisition. On the eve of the 2020 debate, 51 ex–intel officials perjured themselves, branding Hunter Biden’s laptop “Russian
 disinformation” to swing the election. And when Biden’s senescence became undeniable, Democrats and their media allies buried it until the debate exposed the fraud.

This normalization of depravity is the true peril — not just corruption, but enervation. Profanity, lies, logical fallacies, and projection now form the left’s playbook, trapping us in an endless doom loop. Decency is now a quaint relic, sacrificed on the altar of a “moral imperative.” Each escalation begets a new normal:

 censorship, selective prosecution, media manipulation — all tools Democrats forged, now blowing up in their faces.

Today, they’re the impotent ones: no White House, Congress, or Supreme Court. Their media and academic allies reel under scrutiny. They played God with institutions, and now they cry foul as the machine turns on them. Revolutions tend to devour their children. They state their goals clearly — imprison Trump, abolish the Electoral College, stack the Supreme Court, ban voter ID, censor free speech, and re-open the border. That’s their plan to save “our democracy.” They can’t see the irony of projecting their own sins onto Trump, accusing him of the very democratic arson they’ve perfected.

Thanks to Elon Musk reforming Twitter/X, their accusations and agenda are now immediately incinerated, and their posts are ratioed into oblivion. They are daily reduced to objects of ridicule and scorn.

Democrats built this inferno to immolate one man. Now, watching it surge back on them, they rage at not their hypocrisy, but their powerlessness. Saving democracy? Just as their bungled response turned smoldering brushfires in L.A. and Hawaii into apocalyptic blazes, they’ve fanned a petty grudge into an inferno that is engulfing their own party.


Monday, November 3, 2025

'It's Patently False': Steve Scalise Accuses Chuck Schumer Of
'Misleading' People On The Shutdown


Nov 3, 2025 At a press briefing on Monday, Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) spoke about comments made by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on the government shutdown.



Thursday, September 25, 2025

 



 I took this post from someone else's site. I won't publish the authors name  because....Todays world !

 FOOD FOR THOUGHT 

Something I'm seeing since the tragic passing of Charlie Kirk that I'd like to share my thoughts on....
 
A constant question being asked in my "interweb feeds".... "Where was the outrage for Melissa Hortman and her husband? Where was the outrage for children killed at school? Where was the outrage for (insert any other life lost in tragic, preventable scenerios)?"

The implication? That the grief people feel now is somehow unjustified because it isn’t equal to grief for others.
Here’s the truth: outrage is human, not mathematical.
We don’t measure grief on a scoreboard.
It’s shaped by MANY things, and in this case it's being shaped by proximity, connection, visibility, and what we witness.

I still think those are valid questions that are being asked, however - because EVERYONE'S questions in times like this are valid... So, if I could give an answer it would be simply in the form of a request to consider these things:

1) CONNECTION changes EMOTION.
We always grieve harder when we feel connected.
I didn’t mourn my grandfather when he passed (we weren’t close). But my grandmother’s passing still breaks me 15 years later.
Just as an example, most of America had never heard of the Hortmans until tragedy struck. But Charlie Kirk - love him or hate him - was in our feeds daily. That presence makes his loss feel more personal, even if you never met him.
It’s the same reason we mourn a close friend differently than a stranger. Both lives matter equally, but one hits our hearts differently. It’s absolutely NOT that one life is worth more, it’s just that our CONNECTION to people shapes our emotions.

2) We WITNESSED IT.
This wasn’t just news.
Millions literally saw it happen.
The violent death of a public figure, in front of his family, replayed everywhere. That kind of trauma doesn’t just land in your head, it lands in your body. That absolutely changes everything about how it effects us.
Imagine getting a CALL that your loved one has passed, and compare that to WATCHING it happen. You would undoubtedly have a different reaction, process things differently, experience a set of emotions more viscerally. Your grief still exists in both situations, but very likely amplified in the one that leaves an image in your brain for forever.
 
3) IT'S BEING CELEBRATED.
I don’t recall people celebrating the deaths of Melissa Hortman and her husband, or schoolchildren who were supposed to be in a safe space.
 
But there are millions of comments celebrating Charlie’s. That alone fuels a heightened response. Social feeds are flooded with mockery and cheers. That intensifies the outrage.

No one grieving Charlie is saying his life was worth more than anyone else’s. But millions online are saying...even celebrating...that his life was worth less.

People aren’t “hypocrites” for reacting differently. Different circumstances create different emotions. That doesn’t mean one life is more valuable. It just means we’re human.

The real sickness is in the voices that cheer death, that devalue life, that call evil “justice.”
Grief isn’t math. We feel it differently depending on connection, visibility, and how tragedy unfolds.

But what should unite us all is this: violence is never ok, and celebrating it is poison to our humanity.

Pray for our nation.
Pray for the victims and families of ALL of these crimes.
Pray that hearts are softened and humanity restored.




Wednesday, September 24, 2025

Voice for the Silent (Official Lyric Video) - Country Tribute Song


Friday, September 19, 2025

Here's an interesting fact



After the Japanese decimated our fleet in Pearl Harbor Dec 7, 1941, they could have sent their troop ships and carriers directly to California to finish what they started. The prediction from our Chief of Staff was we would not be able to stop a massive invasion until they reached the Mississippi River. Remember, we had a 2 million man army and war ships in other localities, so why did they not invade?

After the war, the remaining Japanese generals and admirals were asked that question. Their answer....they know that almost every home had guns and the Americans knew how to use them.

1. The world's largest army ... America 's hunters! I had never thought about this....
2. A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion:
3.There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin 
4. Allow me to restate that number.
5. Over the last several months, Wisconsin ’s hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.
6. More men under arms than in Iran .
7. More than in France and Germany combined.
8. These men deployed to the woods of a single American state to hunt with firearms, and no one was killed.
9. That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan 's 700,000 hunters
10. All of whom have now returned home.
11. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that
12. The hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. The number of Hunters in the state of Texas would be the largest standing army in the world by it's self.
13. The point?
14. America
15. Hunting -- it's not just a way to fill the freezer. It's a matter of national security.
16. That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.
17. Food for thought when next we consider gun control.


Ryan Azzopardi June 23, 2024
Borrowed from someone elses page