Civil Rights Infographic (1890-1921)

Infographic Exposing Dark Racial Past of the Democratic Party, and the Republican Party's Struggle to Bring Equal Rights to All Americans (1863-1880s)

Infographic Exposing Dark Racial Past of the Democratic Party, and the Republican Party’s Struggle to Bring Equal Rights to All Americans (1890-1921)

Picture of the Destruction of Manly Printing Press, November 10, 1898.

1) The Wilmington “Race Riot” of 1898 – A Democrat Party mob attacked an African American owned newspaper, burning it to the ground and killing at least 14 and possible up to 60. Many high profile black leaders fled the city, along with many whites, over 2,100 in all. No repercussions came to the democrats.

1898 Wilmington Race Riot Commission Final Report 31 May, 2006

Democrat Party in North Carolina perpetrated “the only confirmed coup d’etat in American history, when Democrats forced the lawfully elected Republican leaders of Wilmington, North Carolina, (Republican mayor, Board of Aldermen, and Chief of Police) out of office at gun-point.” This was an attack on the US Constitution. Wrong on Race

This report should show that the riot was not an isolated, spontaneous, incident but the result of a series of events that were directed and planned by upper class white businessmen in order to regain control of government and that Wilmington should not be viewed as existing in a vacuum. It was part of a larger campaign to take over state government in 1898. Democratic Party strategists thrust the city into the spotlight as an example of Republican corruption and bad government because of the participation of African Americans in local politics.

Organizers of the coup instituted a banishment campaign, targeting political opponents, black and white, leading to the expulsion from the city of over twenty targeted individuals and a mass exodus of over 2,100 others. Consequently, the Republican power base in Wilmington was destroyed.”

NOTE: The Democrats took control of the NC General Assembly in 1899 and Governor in 1901. Largely due to disenfranchising black voters, the Democrat Party dominated NC politics for the next 70 years.

Virginia Constitution:

Jun 12, 1901 – June 26, 1902 – “An elected body of 100 delegates, including 11 Republicans and 1 independent, convenes in Richmond for a constitutional convention, and debates for almost a year.

July 10, 1902 – Virginia’s Constitution of 1902 becomes law, disfranchising thousands of poor whites and nearly eliminating the state’s African-American electorate. It replaces Virginia’s 1869 Reconstruction-era constitution, which had a universal male suffrage clause. The 1902 Constitution created a new legal enforcement of Jim Crow and further solidified its social enforcement.

November 7, 1905 Largely because of the voting restrictions implemented by the Constitution of 1902, 88,000 fewer ballots are cast in the gubernatorial election than in the previous election in 1901.

July, 1971 The Constitution of 1971 becomes law and ends the rules and regulations instituted by the Constitution of 1902.”

Is this racist history behind Democrat Party hysteria that voter ID laws would cause blacks to lose the right to vote? Is this a justified case of Democrat Party “White Guilt”?

Democrat Woodrow Wilson’s Administration (March 4, 1913 March 4, 1921):

2) 1913 Headline Washington Post Headline from 1913: “Wants to Part Races: Thompson Introduces Rigid Segregation Bill in House”, Thompson was a Democrat Congressman from Oklahoma, who stoked the Federal Government Segregation policy of Democrat President Woodrow Wilson.

By the close of 1913 “segregation had been realized in the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Post Office Department, the Office of the Auditor for the Post Office, and had even begun in the City Post Office in Washington D.C. Wrong on Race

For the first time “In 1914 the Civil Service began demanding photographs to accompany employment applications to weed out black applicants.” Wrong on Race

Black political appointees in the South were fired, as were many working in local post offices and as collectors of internal revenue. Wrong on Race

March 17, 1913 August 26, 1920: FDR served in the Wilson Administration as the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, under overt racist Josephus Daniels, who instituted segregation throughout the USN. No record that JFK ever spoke out/opposed segregation in the federal government, or in the USN? WWI kept blacks in segregated units. Hillary’s America/Wrong On Race

3) Republicans like CM John Rogers (R) Massachusetts tried to fight segregation, but they were in the Congressional minority, and ignored. Democrats held a 157 member advantage in the house and a 7 vote advantage in the Senate. Washington Post (Oct 17, 1913)

WWI, under President Wilson (D), the US Military created segregated units, and kept blacks out of combat. Wrong on Race

Movie Bill for Racist Klan Movie "The Birth Of A Nation".

Movie Bill for Racist Klan Movie “The Birth Of A Nation”.

1915 President Wilson (D) held a private White House showing of the “notoriously racist movie” The Birth of a Nation for himself, senior members of Congress and the Supreme Court. Wrong on Race/Hillary’s America. Democrat Presidential imprimatur gave rise to a new explosion of Ku Klux Klan terrorism.

1917 Rep. Jeannette Rankin (R-MT), sworn in as the first woman in Congress.

 

 

 

 

4) “The Nineteenth Amendment was first introduced in Congress in 1878 by Senator Aaron D. Sargent (R). The bill calling for the amendment would be introduced unsuccessfully each year for the next forty years. Forty-one years later, in 1919, Congress approved the amendment and submitted it to the states for ratification.” Wikipedia

Democrats used filibusters on multiple occasions to stop the bill in their “War on Women” until Republicans were ultimately successful in 1919.

House Vote: 85% of Republicans Yes; and only 54% of Democrats Yes

Senate Vote: 56 to 25 (Republicans 36 Yes, 8 No); (Democrats 20 Yes, 17 No)

When the Amendment was submitted to the states, 26 of the 36 states that ratified it had Republican legislatures. Of the nine states that voted against ratification, eight were Democratic. American Spectator

Twelve states, all Republican, had given women full suffrage before the federal amendment was ratified.”

5) Historian Kenneth O’Reilly, Nixon’s Piano: Presidents and Racial Politics from Washington to Clinton.

This period saw the rise to prominence of Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, and advocate for abortions and population control through “Eugenics”.

NOTE: Hillary Clinton received the Margaret Sanger Award in 2009, maintaining a solid connection to the Democrat Party’s racist past. Sanger Quotes:

“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

“We want a world freer, happier, cleaner we want a race of thoroughbreds.”

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members”

Franklin D. Roosevelt (D):

March 17, 1913 August 26, 1920: FDR (D) served in the Wilson Administration as the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, under overt racist Josephus Daniels, who instituted segregation throughout the USN. No record that JFK ever spoke out/opposed segregation in the federal government, or in the USN? DuringWWI kept blacks were also kept in segregated units. Hillary’s America/Wrong On Race

1921 FDR Founds Polio Treatment Facility, for Whites Only. Wrong on Race, Naomi Rogers, “Race and the Politics of Polio”.

Stolen History: Revealing The Truth To Unite America

“The Democrats brought about the Civil War which killed over 640,000 American Citizens for the cause of Democrats Ruling Over Men.

The Democrats put upon us segregation and split the United States population for the cause of Democrats Ruling Over Men.

Democrats are now forcing Socialism upon us for the cause of Democrats Ruling of Men.”

Useful Links:

Civil Rights Infographic (1863-1880s)

The First Civil Rights Era!

Infographic Exposing Dark Racial Past of the Democratic Party, and the Republican Party's Struggle to Bring Equal Rights to All Americans (1863-1880s)

Infographic Exposing Dark Racial Past of the Democratic Party, and the Republican Party’s Struggle to Bring Equal Rights to All Americans (1863-1880s)

The true history of Civil Rights in America is being buried: As evidence, note the US House of Representatives own History link to “Civil Rights”. It ignores the first Civil Rights Era and the first 110 years of history jumping straight to 1964. Americans need to understand our complete history of civil rights, the Democratic Party’s dark role, and the Republican Party’s civil rights fight begun at its birth in 1854.

US House History Page, incorrectly begins Civil Rights in 1964, ignoring the first 110 years.

US House History Page, incorrectly begins Civil Rights in 1964, ignoring the first 110 years. http://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/Civil-Rights/Civil-Rights/

 

Further evidence of how the Democrat Party’s Racist History has been buried. The following quote if from a AP US History Website, which posts definitions of APUSH terms. For the KKK, the site teaches:

“Deeply embittered, some Southern whites resorted to savage measures against “radical” rule. Many whites resented the success and ability of black legislators as much as they resented alleged “corruption.” A number of secret organizations mushroomed forth, the most notorious of which was the “Invisible Empire of the South,” or the ____, founded in Tennessee in 1866. They would approach the cabin of an “upstart” black and hammer on the door. In ghoulish tones one thirsty horseman would demand a bucket of water. Then, under pretense of drinking, he would pour it into a rubber attachment concealed beneath his mask and gown, smack his lips, and declare that this was the first water he had tasted since he was killed at the Battle of Shiloh. If fright did not produce the desired effect, force was employed.”

Where is the truth of who these “Southern Whites” were? They were the militant arm of the Democrat Party!

The strongest example of the Democrat Party’s historical whitewash is shown in the 2010 screenshot from their Party’s website. The site has since been rewritten.

2010 Screenshot from Democrat Party's Website, lying about their racist history.

Screenshot of Democrat Party Website circa 2010, clearly showing the Democrat Party’s effort to hide their racist history.

According to Dinesh D’Souza’s Hillary’s America:

+Democrat Party’s Heritage:

  • Oppression of Blacks/American Indians
    • Stole land from Indians and labor from Blacks
  • Since 1930s (Progressive Era), established modern plantations in the inner cities, added immigrants to the mix
  • Developed confiscatory/progressive taxation system, now taking something from everybody. Don’t forget the democrat driven tax rates of 80-90%. End state, take everything from everyone, distribute as they see fit.
  • From slavery through modern progressivism, Democrats have always stolen the fruits of peoples labor. Now, working to enslave Americans to the all powerful progressive state.
  • Party of deceit, lawlessness.
  • Modern Democrats contort our Nations Birth and our Constitution to denigrate America’s founding, and cover the racist history/nature of their party.

+Republican Party’s Heritage:

  • From its birth in 1854 was the Party of anti-slavery (which ended slavery), and inherited the ideals of the American Revolution (the revolutionary tradition)
    • Conserving the promises of liberty, freedom (political/economic/thought and religion), personal responsibility, justice (justice of rights (equality under the law), economic allocation i.e. free market capitalism).
  • Republicans always stood for letting people keep what they produce and earn.
  • Republicans have always been the party of women’s rights and minority rights.

+Hillary’s America

*Dred Scott: Dred Scott v Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) is universally considered the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court’s. In 1857, a Democratic Party Dominated Supreme Court (7 Democrats vs 2 Republicans) handed down the infamous Dred Scott decision (7 to 2, all Democrats in the Majority), declaring that blacks were not persons or citizens but instead were property and therefore had no rights. Both Republican Justices (Justice John McLean and Justice Benjamin Curtis) opposed the majority and voted in favor of Dred Scott, an enslaved man, and his “God-given rights”.

1 13th Amendment Vote Counts:

  • House: Republicans (86 Yea, 0 Nay); Democrats (50 Nay, 14 Yea, 8 Not Voting);
  • Senate: Republicans (31 Yea, 0 Nay); Democrats (5 Nay, 2 Yea, 3 Not Voting)

NOTE: In 1865 President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by confederate sympathizer John Wilkes Booth. President Lincoln’s Vice President and successor was Democrat Andrew Johnson.

15th Amendment Vote Counts:

  • House: Republicans (144Yea, 4 Nay, 27 Not Voting); Democrats (39 Nay, 0 Yea, 8 Not Voting);
  • Senate: Republicans (31 Yea, 0 Nay, 13 Not Voting); Democrats (8 Nay, 0 Yea, 1 Not Voting)

2 Black Codes: Furious over Republican passage of the constitutional amendments and civil rights legislation, southern democrats passed the infamous “Black Codes” (1865-1866).

Examples of Black Codes common throughout the south:

  • Restricted professions blacks could work in, allowed white masters to whip black servants
  • Restricted rights to own property, buy or lease land, and to conduct business
  • Restricted where blacks could travel, could be imprisoned if caught
  • Blacks restricted from juries, nor could they vote
  • Many crimes carried the death penalty for blacks, but not for whites
  • Testimony in court not admissible except against other blacks
  • Had to carry proof that they were working (labor contract or government license) or face arrest
  • Blacks could not leave their employers
  • Blacks could not possess knives, firearms or liquor

3 Civil Rights Act of 1866:

“An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.”

Contains 9 more sections.

*New Orleans Riot/Massacre: 30 July,1866 – In Democrat controlled City of New Orleans KKK, supported by police and firemen storm and attack the racially-integrated Republican convention in New Orleans. “Federal troops were called in to stop the violence but by the time they arrived the mayhem had run its course. Official reports from the massacre, one of the bloodiest riots of the Reconstruction era in the United States, listed 37 persons (34 black and 3 white Radicals a term for anti-slavery republicans) killed and 146 wounded. Contemporary witnesses believed the numbers to be much higher.” World Library, Louisiana State Museum, Free Republic

“The Committee of Congress appointed to investigate the riot in New Orleans on July 30, 1866, have lately presented a report, giving a full history of the tragedy. It is shown by that record that the riotous attack upon the Republican Convention, with its terrible results of massacre and murder, was planned and executed by the Mayor of New Orleans, and that it had the countenance of President Johnson, without which it would never have taken place.” Harper’s Weekly

Assassination: 1868 – Republican U.S. Representative James Hinds (R-AR), a strong supporter of reconstruction, was assassinate by the KKK, and state Representative Joseph Brook was seriously wounded. The assassin was George A. Clark (D), Secretary of the Democratic Committee of Monroe County, AR who shot Hinds in the back with a shotgun.” Clark was never arrested or prosecuted. Congressman Hinds was the highest ranking government official to be killed during reconstruction.

*Freedman’s Bureau: 1865-1872, a US Federal Agency within the War Department established by President Lincoln, supported by Republicans in Congress to Force Southern States to Comply with newly enacted freedoms for blacks during the Reconstruction era.

Justice Department: 1870, Established by Republican President Ulysses S. Grant to fight the Democrat Party’s KKK.

1st Black Senator: 1870, The Reverend Hiram Revels from Mississippi becomes the first person of color elected to the Senate, and he was a Republican.

2nd Black Senator: 1875, Blanche K. Bruce from Mississippi becomes the second person of color elected to the Senate, and he was a Republican.

NOTE: No other person of color was elected to the senate until 1967, when Edward Brooks, another Republican, was elected from Massachusetts.

Sources: Hillary’s America, Wrong on Race, Wikipedia, World Library Online, Louisiana State Museum, Free Republic, Online Library of Liberty, Stolen History

Useful Links/Sources:

Trump’s Victory and the Principles of War, Part III

P-51 Mustangs Over Washington D.C., 8 May, 2015; Arsenal of Democracy Flyover

P-51 Mustangs Over Washington D.C., 8 May, 2015; Arsenal of Democracy Flyover

  • This is Part III of my analysis of the 2016 Presidential Election through the lens of the Principles of War:(Definitions of each Principle)

Trumps Victory And The Principles of War: Part I

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part II

  • Simplicity: The more moving parts a campaign or operation has, the more likely something will break down and compromise the outcome. Donald Trump’s campaign was as simple as it could get, from his message to his operations, and broke the mold on how to wage successful presidential campaigns. Compared to Hilary, and his main GOP primary contenders, Trump spent less money, hired far fewer people in his campaign, and manned far fewer statewide victory offices. Trump did not pull out of campaigning to spend weeks plotting his responses to debate questions, holding mock debates where every possible response could be scripted and poll tested like Hillary did. He relied on simplicity, where he went out and talked directly to the American people, in person and through social media. Trump had only a few key surrogates, like Kelly Ann Conway and Newt Gingrich, who engaged the Minion Media directly, and that kept his message tight and consistent.

Trump relied on key paid campaign staff, volunteers and local GOP Party support for his simple election day operations, and they combined their efforts to defeat what was supposed to be the most vaunted political machine in history. Trump’s faith in his supporters getting out votes for him, was the epitome of Simplicity, and decentralized execution.

Hillary’s campaign was the polar opposite of Trump’s. Her campaign was a big money, high personnel, high spending, “Minion Media” colluding and intimidating effort that failed to see or believe the inroads Trump’s campaign was making in the “Blue Firewall” and traditional democrat voters. Hillary’s message was convoluted, complex, and failed to connect with voters outside of the progressive coasts.

Joint Principals (added post 911):

  • Restraint: Democrats are known for going for the throat, and Hillary was anything but restrained. She claimed the High Road but evidence such as the Wikileaks dump of her campaign manager John Podesta’s emails clearly showed they played dirty, including colluding with the media to get debate questions, and plotting with the DNC on how to rig the primaries against Bernie Sanders. In the general, her claims of racism and bigotry were nothing but a transparent effort to use identity politics to destroy the GOP candidate. Thankfully, Trump did not unduly restrain himself, and Hillary’s campaign had difficulty dealing with him as a result.

The Allies did not win WWII by using restraint. Fire bombings of German cites like Dresden or the bombing of Hiroshima were not example of restraint. Given that, Donald Trumps campaign was not an example of restraint. Previous Republican like McCain and Romney lost because they were grossly restrained. Republican voters were looking for a candidate to take the fight to democrats, and they elected Trump.

  • Perseverance: Trump clearly followed this Principle. He never retreated, never backed down, never slowed down, and never quit despite calls from media pundits through out the campaign that he was just in it for the publicity, to start a media company, as a fake to help Hillary, and other fake news motivations. In addition, Donald Trump was assailed by more negative press, accusations of racism, sexism, Islamophobia and bigotry than any successful candidate ever. Most others would have wilted under the assault, but Trump persevered and won.

Hillary on the other hand showed a lack of perseverance. She was ill, sat out the campaign for days at a time, and held a very light campaign schedule compared to Trumps. She did outlast her illicit home-brew email server scandal, but it eroded her already poor credibility. Hillary’s lifetime of baggage, combined with her server, the Clinton Foundation FBI investigation and the Wikileaks exposure finally did her in.

  • Legitimacy: As far as we know, both campaigns operated within the legal rules. Hillary morally acted outside those bounds by accepting debate questions and engaging in media collusion and DNC favoritism during the primaries. Cries of Trump not accepting potential election results gave way to Hillary and democrats not accepting the actual election results crying (illegitimate Russian intervention). Ironically, America depends upon the peaceful transfer of power from legitimate president to another. Democrats are out to delegitimize Donald Trumps presidency, and risk anarchy in the process.

Trump’s Victory And The Principles Of War, Part II

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part III

  • Maneuver: The most prominent tactic in the Trump Campaign was his use of massive rallies. Trump crisscrossed the country hitting battle ground state after battle ground state, attending multiple rallies a day, often 7 days a week. He out maneuvered Hillary Clintons lack luster campaign, as she often took numerous days off, and let others campaign for her. Not only did Trump out maneuver Hillary in campaign appearances, he did so on social media, to dramatic effect as well. Trump often appeared on Fox News at night, constantly hammering his message.David Brock himself criticized her campaign by stating the fact that the campaign had no discernable online strategy.

Donald Trumps best use of maneuver was his wildly successful strategy to open up new, once solidly blue, battleground states. Trump was roundly criticized by beltway pundits for wasting his time, money, and energy in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Its clear now that the waste was in the out maneuvered Hillary Campaign.

  • Unity of Command: Donald Trump was clearly in charge of his campaign. If anything, there was constant critique that he didn’t listen to his advisors enough. There were even inaccurate reports that they took his Twitter account away, which would have hampered some other Principles, which relied upon social media. That Unity of Command extended through his campaign advisors, staff and family. Trump exercised that Unity when he replaced Corey Lewandowski, his campaign manager, on 20 Jul despite Corey’s wildly successful performance during the Republican nomination process.

President Obama and numerous other surrogates heavily bolstered Hillary’s campaign by covering for her small and lackluster campaign events. She was missing from the campaign trail for days at a time, and despite her initial boast that as a woman she was best qualified to be president, she called for help from men as it appeared that she was unable to hold her own. Additionally, Hillary effectively outsourced her campaign to the “Minion Media”, relying on them for fawning coverage and leaked debate questions.

Centralized control and decentralized execution are a central component of Unity of Command. Trumps campaign, unlike Romney’s for instance, succeeded because it was decentralized in execution, adaptive and flexible as a result since it relied on local volunteers.

  • Security: Trump frequently spoke during the campaign about the stupidity of broadcasting Americas plans to our enemies, like ISIS, before acting. He understands the importance of Security in running a successful business, and instinctively understands its critical to national security. Trumps campaign never broke this Principle.

The greatest impact of the Principle of Security was Hillary’s gross violation of it. First, Hillary’s violated Security when she exposed National Secrets through her home- brew email server, which haunted her campaign throughout the election. Second, Julian Assange and Wikileaks provided another massive violation of campaign security. Assange released over 50,000 emails from Hillary’s Campaign Manager, John Podesta, and exposed the inner most workings of amount Hillary’s Campaign and how they colluded with the Minion Media. We will never know exactly how damaging these two breaches of Security were, but they most certainly didn’t help her.

  • Surprise: No Principal of War epitomizes the 2016 election more than the Principle of Surprise. To believe the Minion Media, even Trump himself was surprised that he won, which is ridiculous. Certainly the RCP averages did not predict his win, but there was plenty of evidence that Hillary was in a fight from polling to energy in Trumps supporters. Political races are known for October Surprises, and Hillary’s was the Billy Bush tape. The Trump Campaigns surprise was succeeding in his campaign strategy, to turn solid blue states red. He did so in WI, MI, and PN, and Maine’s 2nd Congressional District despite the wizards of smart and Hillary’s Campaign saying that it was folly. According to Hunter Lewis, one of the campaign’s most brilliant examples of surprise, and this could fall under the Principle of Maneuver and Offensive as well, was Trump’s press conference just prior to the second presidential debate.

“With virtually no time either to think or act, the Trump campaign managed to organize a press conference before the debate featuring accusers of Bill Clinton. It got the mainstream media to cover it by heralding it as Trumps reply to the tape, with no mention of the women invited to join him. Once the cameras were already on, and the women filed in, it was too late for the networks to turn them off.”

Trump’s Campaign effectively used “Surprise”, but the effect was amplified because of Hillary’s Campaign the Democrat Party’s hubris.

Trump’s Victory and the Principles of War, Part I

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Analysts are touting Donald Trump’s 8 November 2016 victory as the greatest political upset in American history. No doubt countless volumes will be written over the coming years on what happened in this race and how an outsider overcame the most vaunted democrat political machine any candidate ever had backing them, while also defeating an entrenched republican establishment, overwhelming “Minion Media”and Hollywood support, and double the campaign funding.

Hillary Clinton: $1.191Billion vs Donald Trump: $646.8 Million

In the end, the one thing that Donald Trump did have was the American people’s support.

Over the next three blogs I will assess the race from a singularly unique perspective. My 29 Sep, 2013 Blog “Applying The Principles of War to American Politics” discussed the US Military’s Principals of War, and how the Republican Party needed to learn from these principles, peacefully apply them to defeat progressives and the Democrat Party, and use them as a critical strategic component to return Constitutional freedoms to the American people. Donald Trump’s Campaign Manager, and recently selected chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon, recently said that “politics is war”.

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part II

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part III

President Elect Donald Trumps campaign, knowingly or instinctively applied thePrinciples of War to enable his victory over Hillary Clinton. The lessons are clear for republicans going forward: consciously apply these principles and win.

  • Mass: Donald Trump perfected the Principle of Mass. He massed his supporters at rallies across the country. Pundits argued that the size and energy of his crowds didn’t matter. They were wrong! Trump massed his small campaign staff, a fraction of the size and cost of Jeb Bush’s, or Hillary Clintons, to great effect. He massed his campaign funding, getting far out spent by Bush and Hillary. Trumps campaign also held most of their add spending until the last two weeks of the campaign, unleashing the adds and outspending Hillary down the stretch. This might have made the difference in the election. Finally, and most importantly, Trump massed his voters setting the record for the most votes any candidate ever got in the GOP Primary process, and soundly beating Hillary in the electoral college. Democrats are touting Hillary’s popular vote numbers as evidence of here greater support. In fact, it doesn’t matter. She massed voters in the wrong places, concentrated in California and New York, and not in critical states like Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania. The popular vote is debatable as well. If Hillary massed illegal voters, as some are claiming, then she may well have been beaten here as well.
  • Objective: Both Trump and Clinton shared the objective of winning the Presidency. Trump however spelled out his overarching objective in four words: Make America Great Again. That was his campaigns objective, clear and concise. Winning the presidency was only a means to Making America Great Again. In contrast, Hillary’s objective was purely winning the presidency. Her campaign slogans, like Stronger Together were mere window dressing enabling her election. The American people were more likely to support Trump’s objective, which elevated them, vs. Hillary’s which elevated Hillary. According to Vice President Joe Biden in a CNN interview:

     

    “Hillary Clinton felt compelled to run for president despite lacking a clear campaign vision”…”I don’t think she ever really figured it out”

  • Offensive: Donald Trump set himself apart from other GOP candidates by going on, and maintaining the offensive. Although he was criticized for defending himself too much, he never stopped going on the attack. In contrast with how John McCain and Mitt Romney treated Barack Obama, Trump went straight after Hillary, refusing to ease up, and maintaining the offensive. If anything, Trump was criticized for attacking too often, too harshly, and for attacking not just Hillary, but the corrupt media, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, President Obama, and others. In the end, America wanted a fighter, and they believe that they got one.In contrast David Brock, democrat strategist savant, lamented that Hillary wasnt more like Donald Trump in going on the offensive against the media saying Clintons biggest problem was simply not being more like Trump, at least when it came to dealing with the press.”
  • Economy of Force: Donald Trump wrote the book on The Art of the Deal, and during this campaign he wrote the book on political Economy of Force. No Principle of War was better put into practice than this one. Trumps campaign was run largely from his own money or small donors, which was wisely spent. His staff was only a fraction of the size of Hillary’s. Trump maximized the use of volunteers throughout the country, tying into local and state Republican Party volunteers. Support from the RNC and its get out the vote effort defeated the vaunted Democrat GOTV machine, even though it was outspent. Trump was also heralded for his skill at dominating news cycles. Although much of the “Minion Media” coverage was grossly pro-Hillary, Trump was still effective at getting his message out for free.
    • Significantly, Donald Trump used social media to go over the heads of the “Minion Media”. His 36 million followers between Twitter, Facebook and Instagram heard directly from Trump and they spread the word, at next to no cost to his campaign. The Trump campaign spent only $160,00 for example producing and posting short policy videos and got 74 million views.
    • Trump’s Social Media Director, Dan Scavino, described the slim nature of the campaign to Breitbart News “…there was not some boardroom of political consultants pre-testing talking points for tweets and Facebook and Instagram posts before they went out. It was him, Trump and his iPhone, that led the way in making this happen.”

 

What Is “American Exceptionalism”?

Colonial Fort at Jamestown, Virginia - The Beginnings of American Exceptionalism

Colonial Fort at Jamestown, Virginia

President Obamas interpretation of American Exceptionalism is dead wrong, as is that of the Minion Media. At a 4 April, 2009 press conference President Obama was asked:

Q: whether you subscribe, as many of your predecessors have, to the school of American exceptionalism that sees America as uniquely qualified to lead the world, or do you have a slightly different philosophy? And if so, would you be able to elaborate on it?

A: I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.

His answer confirms that our elected President is completely ignorant of the nature, and indisputable historical grounding of American Exceptionalism. Obama, and the progressive left incorrectly think that the term is a slight to the rest of the world, an arrogant, insulting slap down. They couldnt be more wrong!

In point of fact, American Exceptionalism is a matter of law. Its historically based, and undeniable because it speaks to our Constitution and the fact that the United States of America was the first country in the history of mankind, an exception to every country that came before and after, where the government was designed to protect the rights of the people. America was a country established “of the people, by the people, and for the people” instead of countries that used their people as props to maintain and build up governments. Whether they were pharaohs, Kings and Queens, dynasties or despots the pattern reigned throughout human history. The United States was the first and only exception to that rule.

In America, the people were in charge. The government was there to maintain our God given rights. “American Exceptionalism” is foundational to why we have achieved so much in such a short period of time. Going from 1776 as a penny less government to becoming the wealthiest most prosperous nation in the history of mankind. America has done more good, freed more people, created more wealth and prosperity, health and goodness for the world than any nation in history.

Because of our Constitution, in the United States, the government is there at the peoples’ bidding. That is “American Exceptionalism” Mr. President!

Applying the Principles of War to American Politics

The principles of war constitute the framework from which all military operations should be modeled. These principles represent the combined lessons learned from wars, campaigns, battles, and military theorists across recorded history. Adherence to the principles of war won’t guarantee military victories, but failure to follow them will almost certainly result in defeat. Conservatives (i.e. Freedom loving Americans) and the Republican Party need to learn from these same military principles, peacefully apply them to defeat progressives and their Democrat Party, and use them as a critical strategic component to return Constitutional freedoms to the American people.

Lockheed C-5 Galaxy (Picture from Defense Industry Daily)

Lockheed C-5 Galaxy (Picture from Defense Industry Daily)

JP 1: War is socially sanctioned violence to achieve a political purpose. War historically involves nine principles, collectively and classically known as the principles of war.” (I-3).

JP 3.0: Joint operations doctrine is built on a sound base of warfighting philosophy, theory, and practical experience. Its foundation rests upon the bedrock principles of war and the associated fundamentals of joint warfare.”(I-1)

Principals of War:

  1. Objective
  2. Offensive
  3. Mass
  4. Economy of Force
  5. Maneuver
  6. Unity of Command
  7. Security
  8. Surprise
  9. Simplicity

Joint Principals (added post 911):

  1. Restraint
  2. Perseverance
  3. Legitimacy

Objective JP 3.0 “The purpose of specifying the objective is to direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive, and achievable goal.”

The principal of objective is perhaps the most frequently violated by the Republican Party. One of the biggest critiques of the Republican Party is that they don’t stand for anything anymore. What is the Objective of the Republican Party? It should not be to imitate the Democrat Party. Its objective should not include supporting the same goals of the Democrat party when they go in opposition to the Constitution, liberty, freedom and the history of this nation. The objective of the Republican Party should be to protect the American people, and their liberties. It should be to seal the borders, to stop Obama care at all costs. Its objective should be the uncompromising protection of the Constitution. It should be championing the fight for sound fiscal policy, balancing the budget and strengthening the economy. The objective of the Republican Party should be farsighted to protect the uniqueness of the United States and to never allow its corruption and metamorphosis into the types of socialist or authoritarian governments that exist in most every other country on earth. Objective is critical and it must be clear because no one will rally behind a cause that they can’t see or do not understand.

M50A1 Ontos - US Marine Corps Museum, Virginia

M50A1 Ontos – US Marine Corps Museum, Virginia

Offensive: JP 3.0 “The purpose of an offensive action is to seize, retain, and exploit the initiative.”

Another heavy critique of the Republican Party and its candidates is that they are always reacting to democrat policies, their crisis of the day, i.e. mountains and stay bogged down on the defensive. The American people don’t even care about most of these. The Republicans need to seize the initiative and maintain the offensive. When polled, immigration is a priority for only a small percentage of Americans, so why is Congress pushing so hard to pass it? The answer is that the Democrats are on the offensive, moving to secure their agenda and the Republicans in Congress are left to react. Instead of playing that game, Republicans should be taking the offensive, creating win-win arguments, and forcing the issues that clearly lead to their objectives. Sen. Cruz established such a win-win argument in his plan to defund Obama care by attaching its funding to the debt crisis and government shutdown fight. His position is to fund all of government except Obama care, which is highly unpopular with the American people. This strategy forces the Democrats and Pres. Obama to either defund Obama care or they shut down the government in order to fund it. This is a win-win for Republicans and the American people, and a lose-lose for Democrats.

Mass: JP 3.0 “The purpose of mass is to concentrate the effects of combat power at the most advantageous place and time to produce decisive results…Massing effects of combat power, rather than concentrating forces, can enable even numerically inferior forces to produce decisive results and minimize human losses and waste of resources.”

Tea Party Rally in Washington DC, 10 Sep 2013

Tea Party Rally in Washington DC, 10 Sep 2013

Mass is probably the easiest principle of war to describe in the context of political activities. It’s clear that in an election whichever candidate or party masses the most voters at the polls is going to win an election. It’s also clear that in representative bodies such as the US House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate whichever party can mass the most representatives or senators to vote in favor of their agenda will win. What’s less obvious is the impact of mass on swaying the opinions and ultimately the votes of elected officials. It was the massing of grassroots Americans flooding phone banks, sending emails, writing letters, and interacting on social media that stopped the anti-gun effort earlier this year.

Mass as a concept does not necessarily mean that you outnumber your opponent. What mass means is that you are able to assemble your forces at the right time, and at the right place to overwhelm your opposition. It’s clear that the left employs this principle very effectively. Poll after poll shows that the liberal and progressive percentage of US population is a minority, at best 30%. Those same polls also show that Americans who consider themselves conservative range closer to 40%. The effectiveness of the progressives and the left is that they mass a smaller number of people in large campaigns to present the impression that they are much larger in number than they are. Conservative organizations, such as the TEA Party, need to use the principle of mass in the same way. Obama care was nearly stopped dead in its tracks due to an overwhelming tide, a mass, of American grassroots anger flooding Capitol Hill. The result was that not a single Republican voted in favor of the law. It’s highly unlikely this result ever would’ve occurred if not for the grassroots uproar.

Sadly, an inability to mass a majority of votes in either the Senate or the House resulted in its passage. Mass applies to financing, as well as people and votes. Financing allows the massing of media in the right markets at the right times and with the right messages. It also allows the massing of voters in get out the vote campaigns. The explanations in the applications of mass are innumerable, but you get the point.

Economy of Force: JP 3.0 “The purpose of economy of force is to expend minimum essential combat power on secondary efforts in order to allocate the maximum possible combat power on primary efforts. Economy of force is the judicious employment and distribution of forces.”

Economy of force is an interesting principle of war to apply to politics. A very strong case can be made that the efforts of liberals and progressives in the left has been to overload the rest of society on so many fronts, and in so many areas, that they dilute the ability of conservatives and Republicans to respond. The effect is to make economy of force extremely difficult. The challenge to conservatives and Republicans is to prioritize, to choose the fights that matter the most, and to focus their efforts on winning those fights. By going on the offensive, choosing the battles to wage and the time and place that they get fought, the principle of economy of force can be employed and in so doing put the left on the defensive.

Maneuver: JP 3.0 “The purpose of maneuver is to place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible application of combat power. Maneuver is the movement of forces in relation to the enemy to secure or retain positional advantage, usually in order to deliver or threaten delivery of the direct and indirect fires of the maneuvering force. Effective maneuver keeps the enemy off balance and thus also protects the friendly force.”

Maneuver enables both Mass and Economy of Force. Unions, Jessie Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition and Rev. Al Sharpton are masters of maneuver. Whenever they get involved in opposition to policy, or support for policy, the news cycle is consumed by their marches, picket lines, and blow horn speeches. They consist of relatively small numbers, but through effective maneuver, they can mass and appear much larger than they are. By taking over the news cycle, their positions are echoed across the country.

Unity of Command: JP 3.0 “The purpose of unity of command is to ensure unity of effort under one responsible commander for every objective. Unity of command means that all forces operate under a single commander with the requisite authority to direct all forces employed in pursuit of a common purpose. During multinational operations and interagency coordination, unity of command may not be possible, but the requirement for unity of effort becomes paramount. Unity of effort is the coordination and cooperation toward common objectives, even if the participants are not necessarily part of the same command or organization is the product of successful unified action.”

Unity of command is a difficult concept outside of the military. By its very nature, our society depends upon freedom of thought, unique thought, and the ability to openly express one’s opinion. In the military, unity of command is a much easier principle to apply and is a critical concept of military action. Failure to maintain unity of command compromises the ability to maintain a common objective and its cascading effects compromise many of the other principles of war. One of the tenants of unity of command is a concept called centralized command and decentralized execution. The theory here is that orders are relayed downward, but execution of those orders is left to the professionalism of lower-level echelons in military organizations. They are best able to analyze the fluidity of battle, the fog of war, and execute in a manner that achieves the overarching objective.

Unity of command requires leadership. Republicans have failed as a party recently because they don’t have people in leadership positions that can, or will LEAD. When they do have someone stand up and take the leadership mantle, like Senator Cruz, the establishment attacks them, and creates disunity of command. Republicans must stop eating their own and clearly define conservative, Republican Party objectives (defeating Obama care is supposed to be one). Stand up for those clear objectives, maintain core values and beliefs, and perpetually teach them to all Americans who’ll listen. This may not lead to pure military style unity of command, but it will create a surrogate, unity of purpose. Execution of that common purpose equates to decentralized execution and would go a long way to solidifying a Republican Party brand the American people would support!

Security: JP 3.0 “The purpose of security is to prevent the enemy from acquiring unexpected advantage. Security enhances freedom of action by reducing friendly vulnerability to hostile acts, influence, or surprise.”

Security involves keeping secrets, which politicians historically can’t do. From plans to elections to potential use of Surprise, its important to keep the opposition off balance and guessing. See discussion on Surprise.

Surprise: JP 3.0 “The purpose of surprise is to strike at a time or place or in a manner for which the enemy is unprepared. Surprise can help the commander shift the balance of combat power and thus achieve success well out of proportion to the effort expended.”

October surprises prior to elections, coming up with bogus crisis out of whole cloth i.e. making mountains out of molehills; progressives and the left are notorious for applying this principal.

Simplicity: JP 3.0 “The purpose of simplicity is to increase the probability that plans and operations will be executed as intended by preparing clear, uncomplicated plans and concise orders.”

Pardon the pun, but no Principle is simpler that this one to apply. Issues are hard to explain, and complex issues even more so. Don’t over-complicate them. Ex. Obama care is a disaster, crushing the American people, oppose it at every turn.

Three additional Principles were added post 9-11 in JP 3.0 to define the Principles of Joint Operations. One, Perseverance, is responsible for progressive successes and must be a foundation of a conservative response.

Restraint: “The purpose of restraint is to limit collateral damage and prevent the unnecessary use of force.”

This is the one principal that doesn’t fit well. If anything, Republicans are far too restrained. They allow themselves to be painted as extremists, and suffer from “moderates” like McCain and Graham who torch their own every chance they get. Republicans like Sen Cruz and Sen Lee understand the need to fight, and to show the American People that their representatives are listening to them.

Perseverance: JP 3.0 “The purpose of perseverance is to ensure the commitment necessary to attain the national strategic end state. The patient, resolute, and persistent pursuit of national goals and objectives often is essential to success.”

As discussed above, the progressive left has persevered across many decades to achieve their ideological dreams, and transform America. Conservatives and the Republican Party must take on the same long term, and I argue, perpetual, mindset.

Legitimacy:The purpose of legitimacy is to maintain legal and moral authority in the conduct of operations. Legitimacy, which can be a decisive factor in operations, is based on the actual and perceived legality, morality, and rightness of the actions from the various perspectives of interested audiences.”

Pretty simple here also. If you act in accordance with the US Constitution, you are by definition, legitimate. Anybody, or any policy that doesn’t, is also by definition illegitimate. Support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic. Legitimacy is assured when goals and policies are set in accordance with that oath.

What Boehner’s Quitting Means

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Speaker Boehner is quitting the House…thankfully, so what does it mean? He’s half of the B/M Congressional leadership that’s failed to live up to GOP campaign promises. Mitch McConnell needs to go next. Whether or not that’s possible, the pressure needs to be applied as it was to Boehner.

With his departure, it’s time for the GOP to change tactics from surrender leadership to Principles of War leadership. It’s time to go on the offensive, apply iron clad principles of success and defend America from those determined to tear it down. Application of the Principles of War in the House, in place of Boehner tears, will go a long way to restoring voter faith in the Congress, and boost GOP chances in the 2016 elections.

Why “RINO” Just Doesn’t Cut It Anymore

rp_314110554_150_150.jpgThe term “RINO” (Republican In Name Only) has long been a derogatory term used to label politicians who register as republicans, but act/vote like democrats. Typically, they campaign as conservatives, donning a cloak of voting history camouflage until the election returns are in, and then quickly revert to acting as if they never heard the word “conservative”.

I don’t think the RINO moniker is effective any more. Establishment republicans now dominate the party and sullied the GOP brand. Do nothing Republicans are the norm, not the exception. The challenges facing America are so severe, and the path out of it so clear, that a new term is needed.

The answer lies in Congress, where approvals are at historic lows, despite GOP majorities that were elected to solve some of those problems, and fight for this country. The total lack of leadership by Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader McConnell deserve proper recognition. The only people that they seem brave enough to attack are other republicans.

In their honor, I’m coining a new label “Boehner/McConnell” Republicans, or “B/M” Republicans. I highly doubt that most of the GOP House/Senate members who voted for Boehner and McConnell would run as B/M Republicans. They will distance themselves as far from B/M as they possibly can in the run up to 2016.

It’s time to call them all out, and hold them accountable if they were rank and file, establishment followers. Ask your GOP representatives if they are Boehner/McConnell Republicans, or if they stand with the groundswell of Americans who care more for the country than their party.

NOTE: The only thing more destructive to America’s future than B/M Republicans, are O/P/R (Obama/Pelosi/Reid) Democrats!

  • If General Eisenhower had been a Boehner/McConnell General he would not have launched the D-Day Invasion because the allies only controlled 1/2 of the English Channel.
  • If Lt Col Travis was a Boehner/McConnell Texan he would have attacked Jim Bowie¬†and Daniel Boone as “extremists”, stated that he didn’t have enough troops to win while quickly surrendering to Santa Anna.
  • If Lt Col Travis was an Obama/Pelosi/Reid Texan he would have waited for the cover of darkness before smuggling Mexican troops through the open gate, while proudly stating that the new troops would stimulate the Alamo’s economy.

Solving America’s DHS Funding Impasse

P1030871Boehner and McConnell are both in need, as is the country, of a strategic solution to the DHS funding impasse. The current situation exists in response to President Obama’s illegal executive amnesty. The execution arm for that illegal action lies within the Department of Homeland Security. It’s clear that Senator McConnell is unable to get the existing House bill, which defunds the president’s illegal amnesty, passed in the Senate. It’s also clear that he could quite easily pass a clean HS funding bill. If McConnell and Boehner truly want to thwart the president’s illegal amnesty, and stand up for Constitutional separation of powers, then they need to use the fact that the Senate can pass a clean DHS funding bill as part of the strategy to defund the president’s illegal amnesty.

First, the Senate passes a clean bill, and sends it back to the House. Next, the House deconstructs DHS down to its component agencies, and separately funds those that have nothing to do with enforcing the president’s illegal amnesty through what I would call a UNIBUS. (OMNIBUS is used to describe massive government wide funding bills). The following agencies are some of those within DHS that should get funded through individual clean agency bills: USCG, FEMA, FLETC, TSA, USSS, NPPD, S&T and DNDO. Once an agency bill is passed, FEMA for instance, then that bill is sent to the Senate where the clean bill is also voted upon. It it may be possible to pass these bills without even needing Democrats in the Senate, as a clean FEMA Bill was already passed by the Senate within the full clean DHS bill. It’s possible that McConnell could deem it passed and move it on to the President and force his hand to either sign or veto a clean FEMA bill. The other agency bills should follow that bill rapidly and the Democrats and President forced to turn them back or fund DHS piecemeal. Once the agencies, which are the source of problem such as ICE and CBP, are the only ones left, their funding should be looked at for independent partial funding, and starved if necessary.

In the end this is a positive funding scheme as opposed to a negative funding scheme currently at impasse. The bills would positively fund only those agencies that the Republicans in the House and Senate what funded instead of trying to negatively withhold funds in a massive bill covering all of DHS.