Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Showing posts with label Nixon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nixon. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 28, 2025

Carthage Must Be Destroyed!

By Rich Kozlovich  
 
Editor's Note I originally published this on January 8, 2014 and some of the links not longer work.  RK 
In 2013 the United States Congress was criticized for not getting things done. The Congress “only” passed 65 new laws. Of course we have to understand that one year they passed over three hundred new laws.
What is really important to understand is when new laws are passed the baton of power is passed to the permanent bureaucracies, whose function is to make even more laws called – “rules”! In 2013 there was an average of 56 new regulations resulting from each law passed totaling 3659 new laws called – “rules”! That multiplier has been as low as 12 per new law, but that was in 2006 when Congress passed 321 new laws. If you average out the multipliers over the last ten years the average multiplier is 25.36.
So what’s the rest of the story? Last year the states passed over 40,000 new laws. If we make a broad assumption that the average multiplier applies to the states we now have a potential of 1,014,400 new laws called – “rules!” Rules created by unaccountable bureaucrats, with their own agendas and views of reality, and who, generally speaking, went to college and then into government.
During the first five years of the Obama administration regulatory costs increased by $500 billion dollars, “with $112 billion in regulatory compliance costs in 2013 alone, and predicted that the burden would continue to increase this year to as much as $143 billion”.  The federal registry, where all the regulations are listed, contain 80,224 pages this year alone.  It’s estimated that in ten years at the current rate of regulatory growth there will generate approximately 900,000 new pages of regulations, which will be on top of the approximately 800,000 pages of regulations passed in the previous ten years.
All of these regulations do one thing for sure - create jobs – for non-productive bureaucrats.  It took government employees 10.38 billion hours to dothe paperwork for the federal government in 2013, and will take 78,000 full-time employees to complete the additional paperwork.”
We also have to look at who benefits from laws and the regulations they generate.  In this kind of hyper-regulatory, high tax economy many of these laws and regulations are promoted by businesses that want to make it harder for companies that will be, or are, competitors.  As a “all aspects of business, entrepreneurship degenerates into “bribery and diplomacy.” Instead of focusing on creating value for customers, entrepreneurs spend their time lobbying for favors or to avoid penalties, trying to discern the government’s next move, anticipating or adapting to the newest regulations.”  But this was to be expected from a party that loves big government and “more” laws and regulations - all the better to control our lives.  What about the administrations that have been considered conservative, anti-big government and opposed to all these regulations?  There were more regulations passed during George W. Bush’s administration than any president since Richard Nixon.  Furthermore this idea there is some invisible divide between the left and the so-called right regarding regulations and the promotion of the all powerful state is an illusion.   
“The modern regulatory state is a bipartisan enterprise: During the half-century before President Obama's election, the greatest growth in regulation came under Presidents Richard Nixon and George W. Bush.  And the Bush administration set the stage for many of the Obama initiatives that Republicans are now attacking. Dodd-Frank's policy of designating some financial firms as "too big to fail" is a codification of the Paulson-Bernanke bailout approach of 2008. It was the Bush Treasury Department that first proposed a financial consumer-protection agency, and the Bush Environmental Protection Agency that first proposed regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The Obama energy rules were authorized — and in some cases, such as the light-bulb ban, required — by a 2007 statute that President Bush vigorously championed.”
What about Richard M. Nixon?  Nixon as a strange man and still an enigma to many, and understandably so, because Nixon was the first to advocate what was called a New Federalism, which would ‘devolve’ power to state and local governments.  But he was the first one to jump on the environmental band wagon promoted by the first Earth Day in 1970.  He believed this was a precursor of public concern and he wanted to benefit from it politically.   
Eventually he passed the Clear Air Act, the Clear Water Act the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act, requiring environmental impact statements for federal projects.   He created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).  All of which create virtual lava flows of scientifically dubious regulations, creating outrageous burdens on the American people, and the American economy.   Furthermore, all these laws and agencies give rise to lawsuits by activists that plague economic development with legal costs, studies and delays. 
What is the cost of all these federal regulations to the nation’s people?  One point eight trillion dollars a year!  And I have no idea what kind of costs of all these state laws impose on society.  So what is the solution - at least at the federal level?
No one can fix this piecemeal because it is a foundational issue and until that foundational problem is recognized it will never be solved. So what is that foundational issue? Passage of the 16th and 17th amendments in 1913, which laid the foundation for our doom. 
The 16th amendment gave the federal government the right to tax income.  This gave them the right to confiscate an unending amount of society’s money, [called their fair share] and spend it like drunken sailors. That turned the federal government into an insatiable beast that can never be fed to satisfaction, creating debt that is threatening the stability of not only the nation, but the world.
The 17th amendment changed how Senators are chosen. The Founding Fathers were determined to prevent the federal government from becoming an all too powerful entity that was centralized and out of control. In order to do this they created a government that wasn’t supposed to do very much creating a true balance of power between the central government and the state governments. In those days the word ‘state’ didn’t mean province, it meant an independent nation. So the Senators were chosen by the state governments to be ambassadors to the federal government in order to stop power grabbing by the central government.
After passage of the 17th amendment they would be elected by popular vote, exactly what the Founding Fathers wanted to avoid, because that was already what the House of Representatives was for. That amendment destroyed the balance of power - the 10th amendment notwithstanding. As long as the 17th exists the 10th is meaningless, and by misusing the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution the federal government can overturn any and all local authority, and individual rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
“The deterioration of the Constitution’s separation of, and balance of, powers means that regulators and bureaucrats now make most laws……The executive branch increasingly imposes its will: President Obama and his administration repeatedly say they are not going to wait for Congress…...”
What about the Supreme Court?  Don’t they understand how the Commerce Clause is being misused?  Until the Rehnquist court in 1995 SCOTUS never saw a law that exceeded Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause for sixty years.  In fact, they held the view that no matter how slight the impact might be on commerce it would now be subject to federal control.  If there ever was a system for abuse and tyranny this was it, and now the states were powerless to do anything about it. 
Roman Senator Cato the Elder was born in 234 BC and believed that Carthage was too dangerous to be allowed to exist. Therefore he gave speeches ending in the phrase [no matter the topic of the speech] “Carthago delenda est”, “Carthage Must be Destroyed". 
The 16th and 17th amendments are our modern Carthage – too dangerous to exist.   This is foundational. The only fix is the repeal of the 16th and 17th amendments.   After that - everything else will fall into place.   But first we must be willing to recognize the 16th and 17th amendments really are the enemy - our modern Carthage! 
Sedecim et septemdecim delenda est!

Thursday, November 30, 2023

Henry Kissinger: Time is The Great Leveler of Truth

By Rich Kozlovich

At 100 years old Henry Kissinger has passed.  Unlike the insane virtue signaling morally defective leftists who dance when a conservative opponent passes, that's not what conservatives do.  Conservatives value decency, but that doesn't preclude recognizing the reality, truth, or the obviation of history of who and what they were.  There's no reason why decency and honesty shouldn't go hand in hand, and the world needs to be honest about Henry Kissinger's legacy.

There are four articles I've linked over this:  

You will notice there's no gleeful vilification of his legacy in these articles, unlike the type of glee you see on major media news sites for the death of a conservative leader.  But truth will very patiently wait for us, and the truth of his legacy needs to be exposed, no matter how unpleasantly it may impact who he was.  

Let's start with this incontrovertible historical fact.  Kissinger was a disaster for the civilized world.

For more years than I can remember I've felt Kissinger was an intelligent, over educated, over pampered, over catered to blithering idiot,  and it appears the bug man was right after all, imagine that!  Time and truth are on the same side, and he's been exposed for what a nitwit he was for all the world to see.  Europe made a grave mistake by listening to this nitwit and the man he mentored, Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum, which is in fact pushing on the world a form of viral neo-communism.

"Unfortunately, this reimagined world Klaus Schwab is talking about is the totalitarian globalist world ruled by a few and the rest of us are not happy with their social engineering"

Kissinger's positions and actions have imperiled the world for decades.  He was the one who went to China for Nixon and opened China to world trade, saving Mao and his maniacal crowd of murders.  Since then America has been enriching China funding it's own destruction, and the elitists like Kissinger supported that.

When I read prominent people talking about how brilliant Richard Nixon was on foreign affairs I really see red, and I put Henry Kissinger in that same category.  Nixon opened China up to the world's economy, thinking to offset Soviet influence and power.  And Kissinger was a major part of that.  

Why would anyone believe that was a good idea?

Mao's Great Leap Forward 'killed 45 million in four years' of his rule by selling the food they needed to survive in order to buy arms.  

Mr Dikötter, who has been studying Chinese rural history from 1958 to 1962, when the nation was facing a famine, compared the systematic torture, brutality, starvation and killing of Chinese peasants to the Second World War in its magnitude. At least 45 million people were worked, starved or beaten to death in China over these four years; the worldwide death toll of the Second World War was 55 million..................... State retribution for tiny thefts, such as stealing a potato, even by a child, would include being tied up and thrown into a pond; parents were forced to bury their children alive or were doused in excrement and urine, others were set alight, or had a nose or ear cut off. One record shows how a man was branded with hot metal. People were forced to work naked in the middle of winter; 80 per cent of all the villagers in one region of a quarter of a million Chinese were banned from the official canteen because they were too old or ill to be effective workers, so were deliberately starved to death. .

And Nixon and Kissinger thought making a deal with monsters like that was a good idea?

Kissinger has been a globalist for all of his life, so as you read this article, which was a mere ten years ago, he was still touting the One World Government theme, and blaming everyone else because his corrupt schemes were failing.  As you review what he's promoted over the decades one has to ask:  How can anyone so smart be so stupid?  Answer:  Ideology makes smart people stupid.  

Now as the curtain is coming down, he all of a sudden embraced the foreign policies of  Donald Trump, all of which are totally opposite of what he and Nixon embraced, and totally out of character for him, and the world view he's presented over and over again.  I have to wonder what's he up to?  Even with an ego as massive as his (at the time he was 94) he couldn't possibly have still wanted to be in the game?  Could he?  I'll tell you what. We'll come back to that.

I've not had any respect for Kissinger as long as I've known about him.  If he told me day was light and night was dark, I'd make sure to go outside and make sure.  Even with an ego as massive as his, at the time he was around 94, did he actually think it was possible he could get back into the game? 

Nixon's Presidency was filled with huge mistakes, but opening up China to the world was his biggest mistake.  Mao's economy after his violent and destructive Cultural Revolution was in shambles, and if Nixon had stayed home and minded the business of America, I seriously doubt the Chinese Communist Party would still be in existence.  But he didn't, and now were paying the price for his, and Kissinger's, stupidity.  That gave the CCP the economy they needed to fund their war against America.

Many years ago I had an account who was related to Kissinger, and while at an event he went up to him and said his grandfather, and Kissinger's grandfather were brothers.  I asked what did Kissinger say?  His wife answered, Kissinger said, "Ja", then rudely turned on his heel and walked away.  That told me all I had to know about Kissinger in order to fill in the rest. 

Now the globalist who supported all the massive immigration that's destroying Europe takes an amazing stand about Hamas in this latest war. 

Israel can't yield to Hamas threat to kill hostages, says Henry Kissinger - Asked by Döpfner how he would handle Hamas' threat to hostages, Kissinger said: "Sitting on the outside, it is not possible for me to state a complete answer.""Theoretically and conceptually, I would say that we cannot yield to that," he said. Peace talks are "inconceivable" if "terrorists can appear openly and take hostages and kill people,"...............Hamas' actions, he said, are evidence that the group wants to "mobilize the Arab world against Israel" and end any prospect of peace negotiations......

Theoretically and conceptually?  What's exactly does that mean?  Even when he's right he's wrong.  This attack is an effort to "mobilize the Arab world against Israel"?  Again, Kissinger either fails to understand the real gravity of the situation, or he's ignoring it.  

This is an effort to mobilize the Islamic world against all Jews and all Christians.  This is a declaration of war on the world, and Kissinger is once again failing to understand, or choosing to misunderstand what's going on by hedging reality.  Just as he's done his whole life in support of his globalist schemes, all of which are proving to be abject failures.  

Academics need to be on tap, not on tap.  That way they can be ignored and any damage they may do can be marginalized. Well, how's this for concept and theory?  Europe Let in Too Many Foreigners, Says Henry Kissinger in Wake of Pro-Hamas Demonstrations Across Continent.  In other words all he promoted his whole life was an insane "conceptual theory" that would destroy western civilization.  And of course it's the fault of Europe's leaders.  Make sure to read this article

Kissinger's life has been a grave mistake as his positions and actions have imperiled the world for decades and all that's coming to fruition.  Henry Kissinger, who was unendingly self serving, and I truly think totally untrustworthy, has died at 100 years old. 

I believe he embraced this new tact in an attempt to ameliorate the disaster of his legacy.  But I'm betting history will not be kind to Kissinger, his legacy, or his character.  All of which I consider a disgrace.  While I will not applaud his passing, I am not saddened by his passing.


Henry Kissinger – A Tangled Legacy

America's most famous diplomat passes at the age of 100. 

 by Nov 30, 2023 Articles, Politics @ Liberty Nation News

America’s most notable diplomat and presidential adviser, Henry Kissinger, passed away at his home in Connecticut on Wednesday, November 29, at the age of 100. He leaves behind a legacy that few can match – one as controversial as it is respected.

Born in Germany, Kissinger and his family fled to the US with the rise of the Nazis. He distinguished himself academically and then joined the military before completing his studies at Harvard. From crafting a détente with the Soviet Union and paving the way for relations with China, he was at the forefront of American diplomacy under a succession of presidents.

In 1973, Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in negotiating the Paris Peace Accords to end US involvement in Vietnam. While the Accord ultimately failed, he was widely lauded for his efforts, though others condemned the award over the question of secret bombing raids in Cambodia.

GettyImages-1205328538-min

Kissinger meeting with President Nixon (Photo by: Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Kissinger has the distinction of being the only man to serve as national security adviser and Secretary of State simultaneously – providing him with a level of authority in foreign affairs that did much to bolster his reputation.

He served under Republican Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. After leaving public service, he devoted himself to his geopolitical consulting firm, Kissinger Associates Inc. He remained an influential figure in foreign diplomacy. As The Hill reports, “He was appointed by former President Reagan in 1982 to chair the National Bipartisan Commission on Central America, and later served on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under Reagan and former President George H.W. Bush.”

Whatever one may think of his contentious legacy, Kissinger epitomizes to many what it means to be a statesman, confident in his intellect and ability. As he once noted: “There cannot be a crisis next week. My schedule is already full.”

Read More From Liberty Nation Authors

Henry Kissinger, Former Secretary of State, Dies at 100 - AP Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, the diplomat with the thick glasses and gravelly voice who dominated foreign policy as the United States extricated itself from Vietnam and broke down barriers with China, died Wednesday, his consulting firm said. He was 100.  With his gruff yet commanding presence and behind-the-scenes manipulation of power, Kissinger exerted uncommon influence on global affairs under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, earning both vilification and the Nobel Peace Prize. Decades later, his name still provoked impassioned debate over foreign policy landmarks long past.

 Update:  Henry Kissinger was a disaster.  Please read my Kissinger commentaries:

  1.  Henry Kissinger, the Tallyrand of the Twentieth Century
  2.  Henry Kissinger: Time is The Great Leveler of Truth

Tuesday, November 28, 2023

Nixon and Kennedy: The myths and reality

By Patrick J. Buchanan  

Editors Note:  For some reason I'm finding many of the articles I've linked over the last ten years are being hit, even going back to 2008 a year after I first started this blog.  I have no idea why, but they're good pieces. This one is from World Net Daily in 2013, and while initially I just linked it, I really think that piece needs to be promoted far and wide.  So, if Pat, who I've met, or World Net Daily object, I will break this down into a link once again. Meanwhile, here's  the full text.  

Also, all said here about Kennedy is right on, Kennedy was not who the media made him out to be, when in fact they knew the Kennedys to be a disgrace and covered it up.   In fact, this piece isn't long enough to cover how bad he was.  However, Buchannan was in the Nixon administration and make no mistake, considering the long term consequences of Nixon's foreign policies with China and environmental law here in America, Nixon may ultimately have been far worse.  Nixon was a globalist, and let's face it,  Richard Nixon Was Not A Great President. Accept it!  RK

Had there been no Dallas, there would been no Camelot.

There would have been no John F. Kennedy as brilliant statesman cut off in his prime, had it not been for those riveting days from Dealey Plaza to Arlington and the lighting of the Eternal Flame.

Along with the unsleeping labors of an idolatrous press and the propagandists who control America's popular culture, those four days created and sustained the Kennedy Myth.

But, over 50 years, the effect has begun to wear off.

The New York Times reports that in the ranking of presidents, Kennedy has fallen further and faster than any. Ronald Reagan has replaced him as No. 1, and JFK is a fading fourth.

Kennedy is increasingly perceived today as he was 50 years ago, before word came that shots had been fired in Dallas.

That he was popular, inspirational, charismatic, no one denied. But no one would then have called him great or near great. His report card had too many C's, F's and Incompletes.

His great legislative victory had been the passage of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. His tax-cut bill was buried on the Hill.

His triumph had been forcing a withdrawal of Soviet missiles from Cuba. But we would learn this was done by a secret deal for the withdrawal of U.S. missiles from Turkey and a secret pledge not to invade Cuba.

And after the missile crisis, Bobby Kennedy pushed the CIA to eliminate Castro, eliciting a warning from Fidel that two could play this game. Lyndon Johnson said that under the Kennedys, the CIA had been running "a damned Murder Inc. in the Caribbean."

What caused Nikita Khrushchev to think he could get away with putting rockets in Cuba? His perception that JFK was a weak president.

Kennedy had denied air cover for the Cuban patriots at the Bay of Pigs, resulting in the worst debacle of the Cold War. He was then berated and humiliated by Khrushchev at the Vienna Summit in June 1961.

In August, Khrushchev built the Berlin Wall. Kennedy sat paralyzed.

In September, Khrushchev smashed the three-year-old nuclear test-ban moratorium with a series of explosions featuring, at Novaya Zemlya, a 57-megaton "Tsar Bomba," the largest man-made blast ever.

"Less profile, more courage," the placards read.

In Southeast Asia, JFK had Averell Harriman negotiate a treaty for neutralizing Laos, resulting in Hanoi's virtual annexation of the Ho Chi Minh trail through Laos into South Vietnam.

Where Eisenhower had 600 advisers in Vietnam, JFK increased it to 16,000 and gave his blessing to a generals' coup in which our ally, President Ngo Dinh Diem, was assassinated.

Then and there, Vietnam became America's war.

Kennedy had made a famous phone call to Mrs. Martin Luther King during the 1960 campaign when her husband had been arrested. Yet, he kept his administration away from the March on Washington and directed J. Edgar Hoover to wiretap Dr. King to learn of his associations with Communists.

Since his death, Kennedy's reputation has been ravaged by revelations of assignations and mistresses from Marilyn Monroe to Mafia molls to White House interns from Miss Porter's School.

All of this was covered up by his courtier journalists who would collaborate in perpetuating the Kennedy myth and collude in destroying their great hate object, Richard Nixon.

Yet, contrast what Nixon did with what JFK failed to do.

Where Kennedy managed to get Gov. George Wallace to admit two black students to the University of Alabama, Nixon desegregated 70 percent of all Southern public schools.

Where the JFK-LBJ administration spent eight years putting 535,000 U.S. troops into a war they could neither end nor win, Nixon withdrew all U.S. troops in four years, brought home the POWs and left every provincial capital in South Vietnamese hands.

Where Kennedy had the Peace Corps, Nixon ended the draft, gave 18-year-olds the right to vote, created an Environmental Protection Agency and a Cancer Institute and an Occupational Health and Safety Administration.

Where Kennedy gave speeches about detente, Nixon negotiated the greatest arms treaties since the Washington Naval Agreement – SALT I and the ABM treaty – ended decades of hostility between the U.S. and the People's Republic of China, rescued Israel in the Yom Kippur War and pulled Egypt out of the Soviet bloc into the U.S. camp.

Creating a new majority that would dominate presidential politics until 1992, Nixon was rewarded with a 49-state landslide in 1972.

Whereupon a press elite that had maintained a conspiracy of silence on Kennedy's misconduct seized on Nixon's failure to deal decisively with misconduct in his campaign to bring him down in the first successful coup d'etat in U.S. political history.

The mythologizing of JFK and demonization of Nixon tell us less about respective accomplishments than the moral character of an establishment, which, though it had lost America by '72, still controlled the culture, media, bureaucracy and Congress.

And as they brought down Nixon with Watergate, they would seek to bring down Reagan with Iran-Contra. But that coup failed.

 

Thursday, November 2, 2023

Richard Nixon Was Not A Great President. Accept it!

Time and truth are on the same side!

By Rich Kozlovich

The first site I visit when doing my searches is American Thinker, where I find really excellent commentaries from a number of writers,  However,there are pieces that appear there, as is in every site I visit, when reading their views I wonder what planet they're living on.   Then there are some that are pretty good, but still fail in their history.  

One such article was this piece, Confessions of an 'old' Millennial, by Monroe Wesson, discussing this penchant for conservatives to be "classy" by not refuting the lies and crap leftists spew out against them, and he does a pretty good job of outlining that failure, but his train went off the rails saying:

As a child, I remember being taught how terrible Nixon was as a president, at least in TV shows, movies, and media.  However, when I asked people who lived through the time of Nixon being president, every one of them told me, "They did him wrong" and "He was a great president!"

Saying Richard Nixon was a great president to me I shake my head, roll my eyes, and chuckle to think there are still people who are so clueless.While I agree they did him wrong, as it really was a conspiracy to get Nixon, which included the much lauded Judge Sirica, who was nothing more than a corrupt political hack, and was a part of that conspiracy, none of that changes the fact Nixon was a terrible President.  

  1. He created the EPA, a virtual lava flow of scientifically dubious regulations, which Jay Lehr, my recently passed friend, and one of the original founders of EPA, said they've not done anything worthwhile since 1980 and need to be dismantled, and developed a five year plan to do so.  
  2. He also passed a plethora of environmental laws that are detrimental to the nation, and just like all this global warming scam, they do little or nothing to save the environment, but they're costly to America.
  3. Nixon created OSHA, now a tyrannical monster, illegally used to force Americans to accept these fraudulent vaccinations which are killing untold thousands all over the world  
  4. He passed the Endangered Species Act, which has been another disaster, and over and over again it's the environmentalist's fall back position to prevent any number of projects, often fraudulently. 
  5. He caused the ban on DDT, which was based on the lies of Rachel Carson’s science fiction book Silent Spring, which resulted in de-facto bans all over the world killing hundreds of millions of people since that ban in 1972.  

When I read prominent people talking about how brilliant Richard Nixon was on foreign affairs that really "triggers" me, and I put Henry Kissinger in that same category.  Nixon opened China up to the world's economy, and Kissinger was a major part of that. And now?  Now he's lauding Trump, who's views are diametrically opposite of Nixon's and everything Kissinger stood for and promoted.  

We shouldn't forget that Kissinger has been a globalist for all of his life, and the mentor and sponsor of World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab who has been one of the most destructive forces against capitalism and freedom in the world.  And now, shocker of shockers, Kissinger's saying all the nations that bought into his globalism crap made a terrible mistake.  Remarkable!  This falls under the category of - "Whodda Thunk It!" 

One has to ask:  How can anyone so educated and so smart be so stupid?  Answer:  Ideology makes smart people stupid.   This seeming support of Donald Trump's foreign policies is so out of character for him and the world view he's presented over and over again.  It gives one pause wondering what's he up to.  He's 100 years old, and he's out of time, and he knows it.  I'm thinking he's taking this new tact in an attempt to ameliorate the disaster of his legacy.  But I'm betting history will not be kind to Kissinger, his legacy, or his character.  All of which I consider disgraceful.  

Many years ago I had an account who was related to Kissinger, and while at an event he went up to Kissinger and said his grandfather, and Kissinger's grandfather were brothers, making them third cousins.  Not that close by close enough to recognize each other as family, as my family has done.  

I asked his wife what did Kissinger say?  She answered, Kissinger said, "Ja", then rudely turned on his heel and walked away.  That told me all I needed to know about Kissinger.  If he told me day was light and night was dark, I'd have to go outside to make sure. 

Nixon's Presidency was filled with huge mistakes, but opening up China to the world was his biggest mistake.  Mao's economy after his violent and destructive Cultural Revolution was in shambles, and if Nixon had stayed home and minded the business of America, I seriously doubt the Chinese Communist Party would still be in existence.  But he didn't, and now the world is paying the price for his, and Kissinger's stupidity.  That gave the CCP the economy they needed to fund their war against America. 

Nixon was a RINO before there were RINO’s, at least officially, and mostly because the Republican party didn’t have hardly any members who weren’t RINO’s in those days, and the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats was paper thin.  That changed with the election of Ronald Reagan, and far more after the election of Donald Trump.  

So please pay attention.  Nixon was a terrible President.  Accept it!


Tuesday, May 30, 2023

America’s Most Profligate President Is…?

May 29, 2023 by Dan Mitchell

Looking just at fiscal policy, who is the worst president in American history?

Based on historical data from the Office of Management and Budget, I calculated a few years ago that Richard Nixon was the biggest spender, followed by Lydon Johnson.

But I was only looking at the growth of inflation-adjusted spending during the fiscal years when various presidents were in office.

What about long-run estimates of how various presidents have changed America’s (depressing) fiscal trajectory.

Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post did something like this, though he focused on red ink rather than the spending burden.

That being said, he found somewhat similar results. Only he reports that LBJ was the worst with Nixon being the second worst.


Policy choices made long ago are more responsible for the fiscal state of the nation. Assigning a particular president responsibility for a debt increase is rarely productive, because so much depends on factors beyond a president’s control — an economic crisis such as the Great Recession or the pandemic, for example. …Which president has contributed the most to the nation’s long-term fiscal imbalance? That would be Lyndon B. Johnson… Through an exhaustive study of Congressional Budget Office and Office of Management and Budget reports, …LBJ’s share of the fiscal imbalance is 29.7 percent. Close behind is Richard M. Nixon, with 29.2 percent. Johnson enacted Medicare and Medicaid in the mid-1960s, and then Nixon in the early 1970s expanded both programs and also enhanced Social Security so that benefits were indexed to inflation. …almost two-thirds of the nation’s long-term fiscal imbalance is a result of policy choices made more than 50 years ago.

I’m not surprised that Medicare and Medicaid get so much blame. They deserve it!

By the way, Kessler did not do his own calculations.

Instead, he relied on some research by Charles Blahous. Here’s the relevant table from that study, which was published in late 2021.

I’m not surprised that Reagan was the best president.

P.S. Biden was not included since he has just entered office when the research was conducted. If there is a similar study 10 years from now, I’m guessing he will be like Obama with bad but not horrible results. Yes, Biden has an awful fiscal agenda, but his failed stimulus and the watered-down (and absurdly misnamed) Inflation Reduction Act may wind up being the only significant damage he imposes.

Wednesday, March 29, 2023

Richard Nixon Was Not A Great President. Get Over It!

By Rich Kozlovich

The first site I visit when doing my searches is American Thinker, where I find really excellent commentaries from a number of writers, especially Andrea Widburg, but there are pieces that appear here, as is in every site I visit, when I wonder what planet they're living on.   Then there are some that are pretty good, but still fail in their history.  

One such article was this piece, Confessions of an 'old' Millennial, by By Monroe Wesson, discussing this penchant for conservatives to be "classy" by not refuting the lies and crap leftists spew out against them, and he does a pretty good job of outlining that failure, but initially his train went off the rails...for one paragraph..... saying

As a child, I remember being taught how terrible Nixon was as a president, at least in TV shows, movies, and media.  However, when I asked people who lived through the time of Nixon being president, every one of them told me, "They did him wrong" and "He was a great president!"

Saying Richard Nixon was a great president to me is like waving a red flag in front of a a maddened bull.   While I agree they did him wrong, as it really was a conspiracy to get Nixon, which included the much lauded Judge Sirica, who was nothing more than a corrupt political hack, and was a part of that conspiracy, none of that changes the fact Nixon was a terrible President.  

  1. He created the EPA, a virtual lava flow of scientifically dubious regulations, which Jay Lehr, my recently passed friend, and one of the original founders of EPA, said they've not done anything worthwhile since 1980 and need to be dismantled, and developed a five year plan to do so.  
  2. He also passed a plethora of environmental laws that are detrimental to the nation, and just like all this global warming scam, they do little or nothing to save the environment, but they're costly to America.
  3. Nixon created OSHA, now a tyrannical monster, illegally used to force Americans to accept these fraudulent vaccinations which are killing untold thousands all over the world  
  4. He passed the Endangered Species Act, which has been another disaster, and over and over again it's the environmentalist's fall back position to prevent any number of projects, often fraudulently. 
  5. He caused the ban on DDT, which was based on the lies of Rachel Carson’s science fiction book Silent Spring, which resulted in de-facto bans all over the world killing hundreds of millions of people since that ban in 1972.  

When I read prominent people talking about how brilliant Richard Nixon was on foreign affairs I really see red, and I put Henry Kissinger in that same category.  Nixon opened China up to the world's economy, and Kissinger was a major part of that, although he lauded Trump, who's views are diametrically opposite of Nixon's and what Kissinger promoted, which falls under the category of "Whoda Thunk It!"  

Kissinger has been a globalist for all of his life, so as you read this article there are a couple of things that should come to mind.

  1. How can anyone so smart be so stupid?  Answer:  Ideology makes smart people stupid. 
  2. This seeming support of Donald Trump's foreign policies is so out of character for him with the world view he's presented over and over again, one has to wonder what was he up to?

I've not had any respect for Kissinger as long as I've known about him.  If he told me day was light and night was dark, I'd make sure to go outside and make sure.  Even with an ego as massive as his, at the time he was 94, did he actually think it was possible he could get back into the game? 

Nixon's Presidency was filled with huge mistakes, but opening up China to the world was his biggest mistake.  Mao's economy after his violent and destructive Cultural Revolution was in shambles, and if Nixon had stayed home and minded the business of America, I seriously doubt the Chinese Communist Party would still be in existence.  But he didn't, and now were paying the price for his, and Kissinger's, stupidity.  That gave the CCP the economy they needed to fund their war against America. 

Nixon was a RINO before there were RINO’s, at least officially, and mostly because the Republican party didn’t have hardly any members who weren’t RINO’s in those days, and the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats was paper thin.  That changed with the election of Ronald Reagan, and far more after the election of Donald Trump.  

So please pay attention.  Nixon was a terrible President.  Get over it.


Wednesday, November 2, 2022

The China Lie Exposed

The Chinese Communist Party has held only 20 party congresses in its history, one every five years, and few as notable as the just-concluded meeting at which President Xi Jinping claimed his unprecedented third five-year term. In a two-hour address, Xi aggressively signaled that China will focus on national security, invest in a “world class military,” “develop unmanned, intelligent combat capabilities,” and unrelentingly pursue the takeover of Taiwan under the banner of “reunification.”  All this against a backdrop of asserted rising external threats from the West and a forecast of “high winds, choppy waters and dangerous storms.”

It did not take long for Chinese investors to react. On Monday, the Hang Seng plummeted 6.4% (equivalent to a 2,000 drop in the Dow Jones index), for the largest one-day drop since November 2008. The index is down 42% for the year and within 2% of its 52-week low. In the tech sector, e-commerce giant Alibaba fell 10%, bringing its losses to more than $600 billion since it peaked in October 2020. Chip stocks are being dumped in response to expected U.S. export controls. The property sector is facing unrelenting pressure from massive over-building and excess debt. Chinese entrepreneurs are leaving the country. Official and unofficial accounts track massive movements of capital to havens outside of China. All in all, quite the contrast to President Xi’s boasting rhetoric of “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”................To Read More.....


Thursday, July 7, 2022

The Federal Judiciary is Filled With Political Hacks

By Rich Kozlovich 

On July 5th, 2020 Henry P. Wickham, Jr. published this piece, Watergate and the Corruption of the DC Judiciary, filled with interesting insights from two books, Geoff Shepard's book, The Real Watergate Scandal and the just published book by Garrett Graff, Watergate, a New History.  I've decided to break this piece down into sections.  The first dealt with John Dean and this next section deals with the federal judiciary, and Judge Sirica.  

He goes on to say:

The handling of the criminal cases against "all the president's men" was disgraceful as Shepard makes clear. What the president's men did was criminal, but that shouldn't have been a pretext for denying them fair trials and due process.

I remember those days and the nation pretty much thought Judge John Sirica was the nation's judicial giant who was going to make sure "justice" was served.  When in reality acted in an illegal and unethical way as an investigator and prosecutor, he wasn't a judge, he was a bigger crook than Nixon, who I consider one of the worst Presidents of the 20th century.  We'll come back to that. 

Sirica used his power as a judge to manipulate the circumstance to be assured of a guilty verdict by making sure the case would be heard in Washington, and the article notes he apparently interfered with jury selection saying:

'"voir dire" of potential jurors that guaranteed biased juries.  He made prejudicial comments in front of the jury. He sought to bolster John Dean's credibility by giving him a long prison sentence following his guilty plea. He did so knowing that Dean would never serve a day, and that he would commute or cancel this sentence once Dean testified as Sirica wanted.

Apparently Sirica and his team of co-conspirators decided Dean needed credibility so he sentenced him to a lot of prison time, all knowing he would never serve out that time.  Which must have been part of the conspiracy he and the prosecutors cooked up during one of the illegal private meetings regarding this case.  No defense counsel was ever present at any of them.  Meetings where tactics and strategies were discussed and:

Sirica even provided a list of more persons he wanted the special counsel to indict. So much for due process and trials overseen by an impartial judge.

Sirica wasn't the lone jurist in this criminal behavior:

In a blatantly unethical meeting, Archibald Cox met with Bazelon with no defense counsel present. He was able to get Bazelon to agree that all appeals from any Watergate case coming out of the DC District Court would be heard "en banc," or before all nine judges. By so agreeing, Bazelon guaranteed that there would never be a case where there could be a three-judge panel with a Republican majority. The Democrats would always have the majority and the prosecutors would win any appeal. Not surprisingly, no appeals of Watergate defendants were successful. 

The author goes on to state: 

At the very least, the actions in these Watergate criminal cases by Sirica, Bazelon, and the prosecutors were unethical and prejudicial. Had these meetings come to light at that time, they would have been grounds for new trials or changes of venue outside the DC District Court. These prejudicial actions could have led to impeachment of the judges and even disbarment after an honest accounting of how these cases were prosecuted. But these meetings were never disclosed when it mattered.

When it comes to the federal judiciary there are a number of things I've stated over and over again.  

The federal judiciary is out of control acting in violation of their Constitutional boundaries.  Congress has gutlessly allowed them to get away with it, and until SCOTUS overturned Roe v Wade, the Democrats rapturously defended their ability to find unstated "rights" from previously unknown and unrecognized "   Epiphanous visions only left wing political hacks masquerading as jurists could see.    

Only now is the Congress talking about standing up for their Constitutionally defined rights in overturning that decision with legislation.  It's sad when the Congress only discovered it's spine when a "right" that was a "wrong" has been overturned.  They've decided it's time to stand up to SCOTUS because the court finally and actually stood up for the Constitution as intended, instead of corrupting it.  

Finally, the federal system of justice is filled with corruption, from the prosecutors to the judiciary, both of which are filled with ideological political hacks, not impartial jurists. Political activists  who have allowed power to corrupt them and corrupt their decisions.  The federal judiciary is in serious need of age and term limits, along with Congress.  Including U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan who was thought at times to be a courageous jurist standing against and his corrupt band, but in the end he overturned every ethical standard for impartiality there is.  

We've seen this outrageous corruption, especially in the DC District, in dealing with these January 6 demonstrators, many of whom have been imprisoned illegally without bail or the right to counsel for many months, forcing guilty pleas just to be released or give light sentences.  We saw this with General Michael Flynn, all part of an Obama motivated Deep State conspiracy, an American hero that was grievously wronged.

Back to Richard Nixon.  I consider Nixon to be one of the four worst Presidents in American history.  

First on my list is Teddy Roosevelt, because he gave personality to the progressive movement.  He laid the intellectual, emotional and psychological groundwork which allowed the second worst President, Woodrow Wilson, called America's first fascist President, to impose his fascist dictatorial policies, using America's unnecessary involvement in WWI as a justification, or excuse if you like, where he had opponents to his visions imprisoned without charge or trial, many of whom didn't get released until Harding became President. Sound familiar?

Both Roosevelt and Wilson believed the Constitution was an impediment to human progress and subscribed to the concept of L'état, c'est moi .  I am the state.   Next came Franklin D. Roosevelt, who wanted to pack the court to get his clearly unconstitutional New Deal policies passed, which wasn't a new deal at all, it was in fact a recycling of Wilson's fascist policies with many of the same people from that administration heading up Roosevelt's many agencies, all of whom were thoroughly infested with communists, socialists, Soviet agents and fellow travelers.  His administration is considered the most enemy infiltrated government in the history of the world.  

Then Nixon.  We're still suffering the consequences of the Carter administration, but Nixon created long term negative consequences in more areas than Carter ever could have ever  done.  Nixon ended the gold standard, he opened China to the world in effect financing their efforts to defeat America.  He created the EPA, passed the Endangered Species Act and a host of other laws that have been used as bludgeons by unelected and out of control bureaucrats redefining the laws to their personal liking and passing unwarranted regulations.  Which now SCOTUS has decided doesn't really have the Constitutional authority to impose.  

So, it's hard to bleed all over ourselves over what happened to Nixon and his band of crooks.   But it's easy to bleed all over ourselves over the corrupt way the federal judiciary and corrupt prosecutors conducted themselves then and are conducting themselves now.  

The author concludes with this statement:

Among many lessons, Watergate shows us how power can corrupt and how investigations and legal processes can be abused. This is just what we saw with the case of Michael Flynn, among many others, post 2016, and as we now see with the selective and politically motivated prosecutions by the Biden Justice Department; Attorney General, Merritt Garland being every bit the light weight, political hack that John Sirica was. 

America is in crisis.

Thursday, May 19, 2022

The Truth You Never Learned about Watergate

John Dale Dunn  
 
In 2019, I wrote here and here at American Thinker of the work of Geoff Shepard — certainly the reigning expert on the Watergate Affair because of his long history of scholarship and archive- and document-diving.  At the time, I interviewed Mr. Shepard.  I asked him to assess what he knew about Watergate and to compare the Watergate affair to what was happening in D.C. with the Trump coup attempt.  I also solicited his opinions on what is being called the Deep State and its role in the Russia/Trump collusion plot.  By that time, both Mr. Shepard and I were convinced that there were some lessons to be learned, but he withheld his opinions because he is a careful writer and attorney and had not investigated the Trump matters in depth.........To Read More...
 
 

Saturday, April 16, 2022

The Bay of Pigs: The Sickening Truth, Parts I and II

Editor's Note:  Part II came out yesterday.  I deliberately chose not to publish Part I when it came out last Saturday in order to publish Parts I and II at the same time. This is a story that can't be told often enough, and no one tells it as well as Humberto Fontova, who has graciously allowed be to publish his work for some years.  You may wish to view my For those who may have wondered at the utter contempt I've expressed for JFK over the years, this will explain it, as this was the most vile act of his corrupt life.  RK

Humberto Fontova Humberto Fontova  Apr 09, 2022 @ Townhall.com

 The Bay of Pigs: The Sickening Truth, Part I

 “I really admire toughness and courage, and I will tell you that the people of this brigade (Bay of Pigs freedom-fighters) 2506 really have that…you were let down by our country.'' (Donald Trump, addressing Bay of Pigs Veterans at Bay of Pigs museum Miami Fl, 11/16, 1999.)

“It’s a great honor and I’m humbled for this endorsement from these freedom fighters—from TRUE freedom fighters… You were fighting for the values of freedom and liberty that unite us all. (Candidate Donald Trump, receiving endorsement of Bay of Pigs Veterans at Bay of Pigs museum Miami Fl, 10/25, 2016.)

“The Republicans have allowed a communist dictatorship to flourish eight jet minutes from our borders…We must support anti-Castro fighters. So far these freedom fighters have received no help from our government.”(Presidential candidate John F. Kennedy baiting Richard Nixon during the famous 1960 debates.) 

Short weeks before the debates CIA chief Allen Dulles (on President Eisenhower’s orders) had briefed Kennedy about Cuban invasion plans (what became the Bay of Pigs invasion,) so Kennedy was lying through his teeth. He knew damn well the Republican administration was training Cuban freedom fighters. And since the plans were secret, he knew damn well Nixon couldn’t rebut. So Nixon bit his tongue. He could easily have stomped Kennedy on it. But to some candidates national security trumps debating points.

To blindside his Republican opponent Kennedy relied on that opponent's patriotism. Let's face it, Republicans are at a woeful disadvantage here. Nixon bit his tongue. He could easily have stomped Kennedy on it. But to some candidates national security (and those freedom-fighters lives) outweighs debating points.

"We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty," proclaimed President Kennedy at his inauguration. 

Not only had KGB satraps the Castro brothers and Che Guevara extinguished liberty “eight jet minutes from U.S. borders” but had also sent armed guerrillas to attempt the violent overthrow of five sovereign Latin American countries, (Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Panama, Venezuela, Haiti,) had stolen $2 billion from American businessmen at Soviet gun point after torturing and murdering several U.S. citizens who resisted, had invited in thousands of Soviet military and police agents, had kidnapped 50 U.S. citizens from Guantanamo Bay, and jailed and executed several Americans—all this before the U.S. even started contingency plans to disturb them.  

In fact during this period, the State Dept. made over 10 back channel diplomatic attempts to ascertain the cause of Castro’s tantrums and attempt to appease him. Argentine President Arturo Frondizi (himself a leftist) was the conduit for many of these and recounts their utter futility in his memoirs. At long last the U.S. started contingency planning for what came to be known as the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Surely, in light of all the factors above, we’re among the luckiest freedom-fighters in modern history, must have reasoned the Cuban volunteers. Few great powers in history have had such overwhelming justification for intervening against a neighboring terrorist enemy than does the mighty USA in April of 1961. And the newly elected, fire-breathing President has gone on record-- both as candidate and as Commander in Chief of the world’s most powerful nation-- promising to back us to the hilt against the Communist regime wrecking our homeland, jailing, torturing and murdering our families, and subverting half the hemisphere on behalf of the Soviet Empire.  

"Freedom is our GOAL!" Roared Pepe San Roman to the men he commanded on April 10, 1961. "Cuba is our CAUSE! God is on our SIDE! ON TO VICTORY!" 

Fifteen hundred men crowded before San Roman at their Guatemalan training camps that day. The next day they’d embark for a port in Nicaragua, the following day for a landing site in Cuba named Bahia De Cochinos (Bay of Pigs). Their outfit was known as Brigada 2506, and at their commander’s address the men absolutely erupted... 

A scene of total bedlam unfolded. Hats flew. Men hugged. Men sang and cheered. Men wept. The hour of liberation was nigh – and these men were putting their lives on the line to see their dream fulfilled. Their dream was a Cuba free from the murderous barbarism that tortured it, free from firing squads, torture chambers and the teeming Castroite Gulag. A Cuba where the chilling command of "FUEGO!" to firing squads would be a horrible memory and nothing more. A Cuba where patriots served their nation. Not one where they were beaten, bound, gagged and tied to a stake at dawn, to be riddled by Russian bullets on the order of KGB satraps. 

Terms like "liberation" were point-blank and crystal clear to these men. No navel gazing about the merits of "regime change" for them. Babbling foreigners in sandals and strange robes wouldn’t be the ones greeting them. They’d be bashing open prison doors and bulldozing down barbed wire, all right – but their own fathers, uncles, cousins and even sisters, aunts, daughters would be the ones staggering out to suffocate them with hugs and sobs. 

One of 19 Cubans was a political prisoner that horrible year. Dozens of American citizens languished in Cuba’s KGB-designed dungeons too. 

Every one of those proud and pumped men (and boys – some were as young as 16) of Brigada 2506 was a volunteer. A good number had wives and children. Some were formerly wealthy. 

"SEE?! SEE?!" snivel the pinkos "We told ya! Only those beastly, slave-driving sugar mill, gambling casino and factory owners opposed Castro!" 

Other freedom-fighters hailed from humble backgrounds …"SEE?! SEE?!" snivel the pinkos again. "Just like those effete millionaires to sit back and hire their gardeners and foot servants to recoup their mansions for them!" 

Forget trying facts and logic with Castro and Che Guevara groupies. You’re better off trying to wean your teenybopper daughter from her Justin Bieber poster. Point is, Brigade 2506 included men from every social strata and race in Cuba – from sugar cane planters to sugar cane cutters, from aristocrats to their chauffeurs. But mostly, the folks in between, as befit a nation with a larger middle class than much of Europe of the time. 

“My observations the last few days have increased my confidence in the ability of this force to accomplish not only initial combat missions, but also the ultimate objective of Castro’s overthrow.  These (Cuban) officers are young, vigorous, intelligent and motivated with a fanatical urge to begin battle for which they have supreme confidence they will win all engagements against the best Castro has to offer. I share that confidence.” 

This was the final report before they hit the beaches from Marine Col. Jack Hawkins, a highly decorated WWII and Korea vet, who after escaping from Japanese captivity after the Bataan Death March, trained and organized Philippine guerrillas then helped plan the invasion of Okinawa. During the Korean war Hawkins landed at Inchon and fought his way out of Red Chinese encirclement at the famous battle of “Frozen” Chosin Reservoir. I’d say Col. Hawkins qualified as a good judge of military morale.    

“In war morale forces are to physical as three to one,” famously said Napoleon Bonaparte.

(Tune in next week when we hit the beaches with Brigada 2506.)  

The Bay of Pigs: The Sickening Truth Part II, The Battle is Joined

 
 
The Bay of Pigs: The Sickening Truth Part II, The Battle is Joined

"They fought like Tigers," wrote a CIA officer who helped train the Cuban freedom-fighters who landed at The Bay of Pigs 61 years ago this week... "But their fight was doomed before the first man hit the beach." 

That CIA man, Grayston Lynch, knew something about fighting -- and about long odds. He carried scars from Omaha Beach, The Battle of the Bulge and Korea's Heartbreak Ridge. But in those battles, Lynch and his band of brothers could count on the support of their own chief executive. 

At the Bay of Pigs, Lynch and his band of Cuban brothers learned -- first in speechless shock and finally in burning rage -- that their most powerful enemies were not Castro's Soviet-armed and led soldiers massing in Santa Clara, Cuba, but the Ivy League's Best and Brightest dithering in Washington. 

Lynch trained, in his own words, ''brave boys most of whom had never before fired a shot in anger." Short on battle experience, yes, but they fairly burst with what Bonaparte and George Patton valued most in a soldier -- morale. They'd seen the face of Castro/Communism point-blank: stealing, lying, jailing, poisoning minds, murdering. 

They'd heard the chilling "Fuego!" as Castro and Che's firing squads murdered thousands of brave countrymen. More importantly, they heard the "Viva Cuba Libre!" from the bound and blindfolded patriots, right before the bullets ripped them apart. They set their jaws and resolved to smash this murderous barbarism that was ravaging their homeland. And they went at it with a vengeance.

“Where are the planes?!” kept crackling over U.S. Navy radios 61 years ago from a Cuban beachhead. “Where is our ammo?! Send planes or we can’t last!” The pleas came from Commander Jose San Roman as Soviet tanks, Soviet artillery and tens of thousands of Soviet-led troops pounded the 1400 Cuban freedom-fighters he commanded on a bloody and heroic beachhead now known as the Bay of Pigs.

The same heartsick (some actually sobbing) U.S. Navy men listening to these pleas had escorted these freedom–fighters to that beachhead. Their ships—including the aircraft carrier Essex groaning under a heavy load of deadly Skyhawk jets-- sat just offshore. 

"If things get rough," radioed back the heartsick CIA man who helped train and befriended them, “we can come in and evacuate you." 

"We will NOT be evacuated!" San Roman roared back to his friend Lynch. "We came here to fight! We don't want evacuation! We want more ammo!  We want the planes that were promised!  This ends here! 

Camelot’s criminal idiocy as the freedom-fighters battle savagely against outrageous odds finally brought Adm. Arleigh Burke of the Joints Chief of Staff, who was receiving the battlefield pleas, to the brink of mutiny. Years earlier, Adm. Burke sailed thousands of miles to smash his nation's enemies at the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Now he was Chief of Naval Operations and stood aghast as new enemies were being given a sanctuary 90 miles away! 

The fighting admiral was livid. They say his face was beet red and his facial veins popping as he faced down his commander-in-chief that fateful night of April 18, 1961. "Mr. President, TWO planes from the Essex! That's all those Cuban boys need, Mr. President. Let me order...!" 

JFK was in white tails and a bow tie that evening, having just emerged from an elegant social gathering. "Burke," he replied. "We can't get involved in this." 

"WE put those Cuban boys there, Mr. President!" The fighting admiral exploded. "By God, we ARE involved!" 

Finally, JFK relented and allowed some Skyhawk jets to take-off from the Essex. One of these pilots quickly spotted a long column of Castro’s Soviet tanks making for the freedom-fighters. The Soviet tanks and trucks were sitting ducks. "AHA!" he thought. "Now we'll turn this thing around!" The pilot started his dive...

"Permission to engage denied," came the answer from his commander.

"This is crazy!" he bellowed back. "Those guys are getting the hell shot out of them down there! I can SEE it!!" Turned out, JFK had allowed them to fly and look -- but not to shoot!

Some of these Navy pilots admit to sobbing openly in their cockpits. They were still choked up when they landed back on the Essex. Now they slammed their helmets on the deck, kicked the bulkheads and broke down completely.

"I wanted to resign from the Navy," said Capt. Robert Crutchfield, the decorated naval officer who commanded the destroyer fleet off the Bay of Pigs beachhead. He'd had to relay Washington's replies to those pilots.

A close-up glimpse of the heroism on that beachhead might have sent those Essex pilots right over the edge. As JFK adjusted his bow tie in the mirror and Jackie picked lint off his tux, the men of Brigada 2506 faced a few adjustments of their own. To quote Haynes Johnson, "It was a battle when heroes were made." And how!

We call them "men," but Brigadista Felipe Rondon was 16 years old when he grabbed his 57 mm cannon and ran to face one of Castro's Stalin tanks point-blank. At 10 yards he fired at the clanking, lumbering tank and it exploded, but the momentum kept it going and it rolled over little Felipe.

Gilberto Hernandez was 17 when a round from a Czech burp gun put out his eye. Castro troops Soviet-led were swarming in classic Soviet human-wave fashion but he held his ground, firing furiously with his recoilless rifle for another hour until the swarm of Reds finally surrounded him and killed him with a shower of grenades.

By then the invaders sensed they'd been abandoned. Ammo was almost gone. Two days of shooting and reloading without sleep, food or water was taking its toll. Many were hallucinating. That's when Castro's unmolested Soviet Howitzers opened up, huge 122 mm ones, four batteries' worth. They pounded 2,000 rounds into the Brigada's ranks over a four-hour period. "It sounded like the end of the world," one recalled year later to your humble servant here.

"Rommel's crack Afrika Corps broke and ran under a similar bombardment," wrote Haynes Johnson. By now the invaders were dazed, delirious with fatigue, thirst and hunger, too deafened by the bombardment to even hear orders. So their commander had to scream.

"NO RETREAT!" stood and bellowed company commander Maximo Cruz to his dazed and horribly outnumbered men. "We stand and fight!" And so they did….and wrote as glorious a page in military history and the annals of freedom as you’ll ever read.

Right after the deadly shower of Soviet shells, more Soviet tanks rumbled up. Another boy named Barberito rushed up to the first one and blasted it repeatedly with his recoilless rifle, which barely dented it, but so rattled the occupants that they opened the hatch and surrendered. In fact, they insisted on shaking hands with their young captor, who an hour later was felled by a machine gun burst to his valiant little heart.

These things went on for three days.

The Brigada's spent ammo inevitably forced a retreat. Castro's jets and Sea Furies were roaming overhead at will and tens of thousands of his Soviet-led and lavished troops were closing in. The Castro planes now concentrated on strafing the helpless, ammo-less freedom-fighters.

"Can't continue,” crackled over the navy radios. It was San Roman again. "Have nothing left to fight with...out of ammo...Russian tanks in view...destroying my equipment." Then the radio went dead.

"Tears flooded my eyes," wrote CIA man and multi-deocrated WWII hero Grayston Lynch. "For the first time in my 37 years I was ashamed of my country."

When the smoke cleared and their ammo had been expended to the very last bullet, when a hundred of them lay dead and hundreds more wounded, after three days of relentless battle, barely 1,400 of them — without air support (from the U.S. Carriers just offshore) and without a single supporting shot by naval artillery (from U.S. cruisers and destroyers poised just offshore) — had squared off against 21,000 Castro troops, his entire air force and squadrons of Soviet tanks. The Cuban freedom-fighters inflicted over 3000 casualties on their Soviet-armed and led enemies. This feat of arms still amazes professional military men.

“They fought magnificently and were not defeated,” stressed Marine Col. Jack Hawkins a multi-decorated WWII and Korea vet who helped train them. “They were abandoned on the beach without the supplies and support promised by their sponsor, the Government of the United States.”

"We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty!" proclaimed Lynch’s Commander-in-Chief a year earlier. 

Tuesday, March 29, 2022

From My Draft File: Stuff I Meant to Post and Didn't

 By Rich Kozlovich

One thing seems clear regarding this insane pandemic hysteria.  At some point these stand and federal government officials, elected and hired, need to be called to account.   And some of them need to be charged with crimes against humanity and sent to prison.

Why Connecticut's Nursing Homes Could Become Graveyards in the Coming Weeks - By Matt Vespa January 08, 2022 - Did everyone in Connecticut fall asleep since the start of the COVID pandemic? It’s hard to fathom how the “experts” can consider this good COVID policy when it’s shown that it was nothing more than a killer in New York. Then-NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo forced nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients at the start of the pandemic. Thousands died as a result, and that should shock no one. The elderly and infirmed were the most susceptible to death after infection. And we all know how if things spread in nursing homes. Omicron is milder. There is no doubt about that, but the risk of death for the elderly, the infirmed, the immunocompromised, etc., is still higher than the rest of the population. Yet, Connecticut thinks the New York model for COVID and nursing homes should be replicated (via The CT Mirror):...........

Triple Vaccinated Swiss Olympic Athlete Fabienne Schlumpf Diagnosed with Myocarditis - May Never be Able to Compete Again - By Jim Hoft - The 31-year-old Swiss runner announced on her Instagram account Thursday that she developed myocarditis. At the time being, she is not allowed to play any sports and participate in training......

Mother Separated from Children After Trying to Flee Country to Stop Vaccination - Chris Tomlinson -

Sen. John Barrasso: Democrats Are Doing 2 Things About Crime: Making it Worse and Trying to Avoid Blame - Craig Bannister | February 18, 2022 - “With Democrats in charge in America, criminals have hit the jackpot,” Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) said Thursday in a Senate floor speech. “Last year, the national murder rate reached its highest level in 25 years. So far, 2022 looks like it may be even worse,” Barrasso said............

 Let there be lasers: Israel to surround borders with 'biblical pillar of fire  By WND News Services   February 20, 2022 - Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has announced his nation will be fast-tracking the development of a laser-based defense system for the Israel Defense Forces to use against attacks from Gaza and Hezbollah. One rabbi likens it to "the biblical pillar of fire." It's kind of like Star Wars According to Israel365News: "The lasers, using an autonomous detection and tracking system, will superheat drones and rockets which the developers claim will catch on fire within a few seconds. The system will supplement the Iron Dome that operates against short-range projectiles with the lasers concentrating on smaller projectiles.".........