Politics The Final Case for Trump One TAC writer wants to stop the madness. A number of my friends and family members are surprised at my decision to support Donald Trump for president. Some others, quiet Trump voters themselves, seem even more surprised I am willing to do so publicly. I am not a Republican per se, having non-voted many times, having voted Democrat in some elections, and being aligned with one side or another on different issues across the spectrum. But this election seems clear. I keep a careful household budget and know exactly how much more food, gas, and minor luxuries such as a meal out have cost me over the past three years. I can see, to the dollar, what inflation has cost and know this wasn’t the case under Trump. The economy under Trump had ups and downs, largely due to Covid, but I fail to see anything on that scale driving Biden-Harris’s inflation. I instead see massive spending, loan forgiveness, and other policies which seem to have a definite negative effect. I see Harris promising to give away vast sums of money to various groups (childcare, small businesses, home buyers, black entrepreneurs), which will be likely to promote inflation. And never mind me—Biden-Harris introduced their economic policies and massively increased spending without regard to their impact on low-income Americans for whom all this is survival-level stuff, not mere headlines. We can’t afford another four years. It is easy to look up how many total migrants were allowed into the United States under Trump, legal green card recipients, gray-zone humanitarian paroles and Temporary Protected Status people, and estimated straight-up illegals. Under Biden-Harris the latter categories so grossly outnumber the first it raises concern. I hear from old friends in Ohio how their small town schools and social welfare systems face severe challenges taking care of new migrants imposed on them by policy decisions made without consideration. I read the news to see how New York City is scrambling to find and pay for hotel rooms for newly-arriving migrants. The system is out of balance, and it is because of decisions made by Biden-Harris regarding the southern border when they took office, not the failure of some Trump-torpedoed immigration legislation years later. I want to vote for Trump so that we can control the border once again. I am not anti-immigration—I am the son of an immigrant, the spouse of another, and father-in-law to a third, all legal arrivals—but fully in favor of a more orderly system which represents American needs instead of Biden-Harris campaign slogans. When you let people in by the millions—“most of whom are unvetted, most of whom you don’t know who they really are,” said J.D. Vance—you’re going to have problems with Venezuelan prison gangs. I want my vote to help fix the problem. I vote on foreign policy issues perhaps more than the average person, and here my support for Trump is clear. Russia invaded Crimea under Obama, and invaded Ukraine under Biden-Harris, and did not invade anywhere under Trump. The Middle East was at relative peace during his term, with the Abraham Accords a positive sign of things to come. Biden-Harris will hand over a weakened global deterrence, with major wars in the heart of Europe and in hotspots in the Middle East, including Israel attacking on the ground inside southern Lebanon again for the first time since 2006. Iran is ever-closer to being a nuclear-threshold state, and no one has talked to a nuclear-armed and angry North Korea for four long years. “Results matter,” says Foreign Policy, “and the relative peace and prosperity that prevailed during Trump’s first term may make him the most effective U.S. foreign-policy president in the post-Cold War era.” I vote Trump in hopes of more of that, and less of the kind of lack of planning and missing thought demonstrated in the evacuation of Afghanistan. I am not troubled by Trump’s interactions with Putin, Xi, and Kim Jong Un. One negotiates with one’s enemies for high stakes, not one’s friends. (Remember Reagan and Gorby?) It sickens me to see diplomacy thrown out the window under Biden-Harris in favor of two new Cold Wars (plus whatever is going on with North Korea). This will not be the last election in a democratic United States. Trump is far from the perfect candidate, his flaws more obvious than most of his predecessors. But the perfect candidate is elusive, and so one must accept much of the good and realize the imperfect is baked in. Trump is a boor at times, crude in his language and demeanor, but he is not a dictator. For all the noise about January 6, power transferred peacefully to Joe Biden days later. It was one bad afternoon, folks. Trump, a man who supposedly does not respect the rule of law, used the law to fight off two impeachments and multiple lawfare accusations. When he lost a case, he appealed, and did not call out any right-wing militia to overpower the court which found him guilty. He spends a lot of money on lawyers for someone who does not respect the rule of law, and a lot of money on campaigning for someone hoping to become a dictator. Like Russiagate, this is outright propaganda and does not give me pause when voting. I do not vote scared. J.D. Vance is capable of being president if need be. I doubt Tim Walz could step in; America is much bigger than the Minnesota he repeatedly called on for examples in the vice presidential debate. His court jester roleplay at rallies doesn’t help. He does not seem serious; stage-angry yes, ready to take on the great issues of America, no. I am weary of being called a fascist or racist because of my vote, and seeing good people disregarded as losers and deplorables for their considered democratic choices. I think the Democratic party has veered way too far left for me to even consider my vote, apparently not that they’d want it. I prefer to vote in the positive, for someone rather than against someone. But to spend a little time with Kamala Harris is to see she is not ready to be president. She was not really ready to be vice president, losing throughout the Democratic primaries and only being scooped up by Joe Biden as VP because she hit the right demographic buttons. Be fair—if she was such a catch, why didn’t she win any primary races? And remember how, during the first three years of the Biden administration, the vibe was how useless Kamala was proving to be. That was all swept away in the excitement of clearing the voting slipway of old man Joe and shoving someone young-ish forward as appointee not nominee. As with the vice presidency, Kamala did not earn her nomination to run for president, because she wasn’t qualified to do so. In addition to her almost entirely blank slate of accomplishments over three years, Kamala has steadfastly refused to explain her policy positions in detail, or tell us her plans foreign policy-wise other then to continue what Biden has done in regards to Israel and Ukraine (such as taking no serious action when 45 American citizens are killed by terrorists and 12 are taken hostage). She brings no vision to the people, and it is dead certain that we can expect more of the same if she were to be elected (she even told us so on The View). She is either trying to hide her real views on things or hide the fact that she doesn’t have real views; Harris is most likely an empty vessel waiting for the Deep State to tell her what to do, all appetite without substance. She lied to the American people about the mental health of the president and maliciously accused those who provided video evidence of his decline of sharing doctored videos. Thank goodness Biden likely at least fought back against the 25th Amendment in the Democratic coup against him. The post The Final Case for Trump appeared first on The American Conservative.

Imagine letting degenerates like this destroy the realm of the Anzacs. ??????? This has been allowed to happen on our watch. It’s an indescribable abomination. Video Compiled by UTL

UTL COMMENT:- We may not have any say in anything again. Charlie was here for a reason because he is a part of every rotten thing that is happening. Can you believe that he is actually allowing this to happen???? The new version of the Great Seal of Australia – a ceremonial stamp authorised by the monarch and used on key documents exercising royal powers in Australia – was authorised via royal warrants signed by the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, and King Charles III during his visit to Canberra’s Government House earlier this month. Australia’s formal symbol of sovereignty, its Great Seal, has been redesigned without a reference to the monarch, breaking with more than 120 years of tradition and triggering criticisms of “republicanism by stealth”. Read below article...... https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/31/australia-great-seal-redesign-king-charles-monarchy WITH THANKS TO:- https://rumble.com/user/THEWHITERABBITAUSTRALIA

Sculptor Gutzon Borglum designed the Mount Rushmore National Memorial and oversaw the project's execution from 1927 to 1941. The sculptor also chose the four presidents who are carved into granite on the mountain’s face. He selected the four presidents to represent the nation's birth (George Washington), growth (Thomas Jefferson), development (Theodore Roosevelt) and preservation (Abraham Lincoln).Since the faces on Mount Rushmore were first chiseled into granite there have been debates over which presidents also deserve to be on the monument. Two years ago, then-President Donald Trump floated the idea that he deserved to have his face carved in granite.A Reddit user posed an interesting question to the online forum about the famous monument and it sparked a great conversation. “You get to add another American to Mt. Rushmore but it can’t be a president. Who do you choose?”That’s a tough question to answer but a fun one to ponder. What criteria does one use to choose the greatest American that ever lived who wasn’t a president? More than 545 million people have lived in the country over the past 244 years. How do we choose one?Do you select someone from the world of sports, science, the arts, literature, civil rights, religion, military or healthcare? What about someone who performed a heroic deed?To rank the responses on the Reddit post, I looked at the number of upvotes each suggestion received and then ranked them. It’s not the most scientific way of doing things but it gives us a pretty good idea about who people think should make it to the monument.Here are the top 20 most popular responses to the burning question: “Which non-president should be added to Mount Rushmore?”1. "Dr. Jonas Salk. Saved us all from polio." — Barefoot_Alvin2."There is already a non-president on Mt. Rushmore. John Cena." — zoqforpikThe Reddit user is clearly referencing the wrestler's catchphrase.3."Dolly Parton." — Airos424."Mr. Rogers." — PitchforkJoe5."Mark Twain. The quintessential American writer. We always put up statues of military and politicians across this country. It would be nice to see more of our creative side get honored. Put up Poe on the mountain. Attract goths to the site." — inksmudgedhands6."Martin Luther King Jr." — bahamuto7."How is Nicolas Cage not here yet?" — deus_vult8."John Wilkes Booth but he's further back behind Lincoln." — Jakovosol09."Benjamin Franklin." — FinnbarMcBride10."Sacagawea." — bivalve_connisseur11."Homer Simpson." — EonClaw12."Bob Ross." — j-oats13."Weird Al." — OntarioLakeside14."Frederick Douglass." — kade2215."Betty White." — Diatrial16.The person who started the thread chimed in with their nominee."Neil Armstrong would be my number one." — taint_licking_clown17."Harriet Tubman." — 44cksSake18."Ronnie James Dio!" — kevinthegeek2119."Maria Darlene Pearson or Hai-Mecha Eunka (lit. 'Running Moccasins') (July 12, 1932 – May 23, 2003) was an activist who successfully challenged the legal treatment of Native American human remains. A member of the Turtle Clan of the Yankton Sioux which is a federally recognized tribe of Yankton Dakota, she was one of the primary catalysts for the creation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Her actions led to her being called 'the Founding Mother of the modern Indian repatriation movement' and 'the Rosa Parks of NAGPRA." — CTeam1920."Danny DeVito." — distantshadowThis article originally appeared on 4.13.22

If Americans were asked to describe the Statue of Liberty without looking at it, most of us could probably describe her long robe, the crown on her head, a lighted torch in her right hand and a tablet cradled in her left. Some might remember it's inscribed with the date of the American Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.But there's a significant detail most of us would miss. It's a feature that points to why Lady Liberty was created and gifted to us in the first place. At her feet, where her robe drapes the ground, lay a broken shackle and chains—a symbol of the abolishment of slavery.Most people see the Statue of Liberty as a symbol of our welcoming immigrants and mistakenly assume that's what she was meant to represent. Indeed, the opening words of Emma Lazarus's poem engraved on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty—"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"—have long evoked images of immigrants arriving on our shores, seeking a better life in The American Dream. But that plaque wasn't added to the statue until 1903, nearly two decades after the statue was unveiled. The original inspiration for the monument was emancipation, not immigration.“The Statue of Liberty we now associate with immigration was a gift from France to commemorate the emancipation of American slaves. Before you lift your eyes to her torch of enlightenment, first pass them over the broken shackle and chains at her feet.” \u201cThe Statue of Liberty we now associate with immigration was a gift from France to commemorate the emancipation of American slaves. Before you lift your eyes to her torch of enlightenment, first pass them over the broken shackle and chains at her feet.\u201d — craigball (@craigball) 1593884368 According to a Washington Post interview with historian Edward Berenson, the concept of Lady Liberty originated when French anti-slavery activist—and huge fan of the United States' Constitution—Édouard de Laboulaye organized a meeting of other French abolitionists in Versailles in June 1865, just a few months after the American Civil War ended. "They talked about the idea of creating some kind of commemorative gift that would recognize the importance of the liberation of the slaves," Berenson said.Laboulaye enlisted a sculptor, Frédéric-Auguste Bartholdi, to come up with ideas. One of the first models, circa 1870, had Lady Liberty holding the broken shackles and chains in her left hand. In the final iteration, her left hand wrapped around a tablet instead and the anti-slavery symbolism of the shackle and chain was moved to her feet.Writer Robin Wright pondered in The New Yorker what Laboulaye would think of our country today. The America that is embroiled in yet another civil rights movement because we still can't seem to get the whole "liberty and justice for all" thing down pat. The America that spent the century after slavery enacting laws and policies specifically designed to keep Black Americans down, followed by decades of continued social, economic and political oppression. The America that sometimes does the right thing, but only after tireless activism manages to break through a ton of resistance to changing the racism-infused status quo.The U.S. has juggled dichotomies and hypocrisies in our national identity from the very beginning. The same founding father who declared "that all men are created equal" enslaved more than 600 human beings in his lifetime. The same people who celebrated religious freedom forced their Christian faith on Native peoples. Our most celebrated history of "liberty" and "freedom" is inseparable from our country's violent subjugation of entire races and ethnicities, and yet we compartmentalize rather than acknowledge that two things can be equally true at the same time.Every nation on earth has problematic history, but what makes the U.S. different is that our problematic history is also our proudest history. Our nation was founded during the heyday of the transatlantic slave trade on land that was already occupied. The profound and world-changing document on which our government was built is the same document that was used to legally protect and excuse the enslavement of Black people. The house in which the President of the United States sits today was built partially by enslaved people. The deadliest war we've ever fought was over the "right" to enslave Black people.The truth is that blatant, violent racism was institutionalized from the very beginning of this country. For most of us, that truth has always been treated as a footnote rather than a feature in our history educations. Until we really reckon with the full truth of our history—which it seems like we are finally starting to do—we won't ever get to see the full measure of what our country could be.In some ways, the evolution of the design of the Statue of Liberty—the moving of the broken shackle and chain from her hands to being half hidden beneath her robe, as well as the movement of our perception of her symbolism from abolition to immigration—is representative of how we've chosen to portray ourselves as a nation. We want people to think: Hey, look at our Declaration of Independence! See how we welcome immigrants! We're so great! (Oh, by the way, hereditary, race-based chattel slavery was a thing for longer than emancipation has been on our soil. And then there was the 100 years of Jim Crow. Not to mention how we've broken every promise made to Native Americans. And honestly, we haven't even been that nice to immigrants either). But look, independence and a nod to immigration! We're so great!The thing is that we can be so great. The foundation of true liberty and justice for all, even with all its cracks, is still there. The vision in our founding documents was truly revolutionary. We just have to decide to actually build the country we claim to have built—one that truly lives up to the values and ideals it professes for all people.This article first appeared on 07.07.20.

A shame. The post “A bit blow-waved”: The problem Johnny Marr had with Bryan Ferry first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Election 2024: Restoration, Not Just Maintenance or Managed Decline

America First Has a Winning Coalition

Election Day: Let’s Do This Thing