By Dr. Robert Owens on June 15, 2017

IMPEACH TRUMP!!!!
That is the screech we’re about to hear emanating from the denizens of the swamp.  It is beginning to percolate already.  Though predicted in this column by this author before the inauguration it still has a jarring impact on the senses.
Back in the Dream Times when the Deep State was able to turn Watergate into a Silent Coup the precedent was set.  If someone tries to overturn the moneychanger’s tables they must be destroyed.  If it’s a president, even one elected for the sole purpose of adding some reality to the mirage of a dysfunctional democracy portrayed by our functioning oligarchy, they must be hounded out of office, disgraced, and discredited.
That’s the play book.  The perpetually re-elected hacks aided and abetted by the ABCCBSNBCCNNMSNBCPBS Cartel and their paleo partners in print have latched on to their intended weapon, “The Russians are coming!  The Russians are coming!”
No matter that the initial facts of the story are ludicrous: the fictional Golden Shower Dossier and the Russian hack of the DNC, which was in fact an inside job.  It doesn’t matter that the very foundation of the Russian collusion theory is built on sand; we now have a Special Counselor.  We can’t call him a Special Prosecutor because there is no legal foundation to appoint a Special Prosecutor, so if we call him a Special Counselor that should fool all of us out here in fly-over country.
Prosecutors always believe whoever they are investigating is guilty and that their job is to find enough evidence to prove what they believe.  Innocent until you are proven guilty, right.  Anyone who has ever been lucky enough to have been involved in a criminal trial and lived to talk about it knows how that feels in reality.  It inspired some to look at the courthouse and say, “It may say justice on the outside but there isn’t any on the inside.”
Remember the Valerie Plame investigation?  Someone blew her cover as an undercover CIA operative.  Before the investigation even started they knew who did it.  Eventually after a few years and millions of dollars they never prosecuted anyone for the leak; instead they prosecuted Lewis “Scooter” Libby the Chief of Staff of Vice President Dick Chaney for inconsistencies in his testimony.
These are search and destroy missions.  They are looking to get at least one conviction to justify all of their expense and to puff up the reputations of the scalp hunters who run them.  This Special “Counselor” is one of the closest associates of James “The Leaker” Comey.  He is staffing his office with Obama and Hillary supporters and we’re supposed to believe his investigation of a non-crime that never happened will produce objective results that anyone anywhere would imagine are justice?
Witch hunts find witches.  That’s what they do.  Have you ever been on a snipe hunt?  Ever find any snipes?
If anyone was interested in finding real collusion to disrupt an American election they could look into the subject of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks; the proven collusion between the Hillary Clinton campaign, Donna Brazile, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  Did you ever notice that none of the principles ever denied what was in the leaked emails, they merely complained about who leaked what to who.  Why isn’t there a Special Counselor looking in to how these people stacked the cards against poor old Bernie Sanders?  He said all along the election was rigged and he was right after all.  Why no interest in this?  It doesn’t serve to keep the swamp damp that’s why.
Our elite masters, the perpetually re-elected, the Deeps State, and the Media Cartel are setting the stage.  They must drive Trump from office before he can actually drain the swamp.  They must drive him out disgraced and repudiated or else we poor blind masses might figure out that we don’t need technocrats to rule us.
I am for establishing a new political party.  I think it should be the Telephone Book Party. I think we could pick the first 535 names out of any phone book in the country and get a Congress at least as good as the best one that money can buy.  At least that way we might get some actual working people in there.
Until my new party figures out how to win a mandate we have to endure with what we have and these political savants are determined to undue the results of the last election.  None of their fellow swamp dweller won, so they have banded together and the twin headed bird of prey that is the government party is clearly on display.
They won’t let little things like votes, or facts, or what’s good for America get in their way.  No, they will soldier on and soon we will hear this predator’s screech “IMPEACH TRUMP!!!! IMPEACH TRUMP!!!!” echoing through the land.

By Dr. Robert Owens on June 9, 2017

Resist 45 and the Government in Exile
Just when you thought it was safe to come out of the packed gun shows his extreme disjointed attacks on the Second Amendment inspired, we’re confronted with the sorry spectacle of a former American President speaking against us on foreign soil.  I knew this guy reminded me of Jimmy Carter.  When you hate America it doesn’t matter what your job is or isn’t, you’ll always find a venue that rejoices as you attack Old Glory.
After an all too brief (for us) vacation orchestrating the Resist 45 Movement from his lair in DC the Instigator-in-Chief couldn’t resist a chance to visit the scene of one of his most famous speeches, Berlin.  The fact that Europe’s leading exponent of unlimited immigration German Chancellor Merkel agreed to receive him as a fellow head of state must have made his narcissistic head swim.
Here he is trying to upstage President Trump’s well received visit to Saudi Arabia by attempting to push his shopworn platitudes down people’s throats instead of playing golf with Tiger Woods.   It seems no one told him Americans are tired of hearing the same old song no matter how loudly the supine Germans cheer as they’re overwhelmed by the migration flood.
“We can’t isolate ourselves,” the former president said from a platform at the Brandenburg Gate. “We can’t hide behind a wall.”  Of course everything should be taken in context.  What was the Ex-President (oh how I love the ‘Ex’ part of that) saying: “One way we can do a better job is to create more opportunities for people in their home countries,” Mr. Obama said. “If there are disruptions in these countries, if there is bad governance, if there is war, or if there is poverty in this new world we live in, we can’t isolate ourselves — we can’t hide behind a wall.”
And do you think that applies to everyone equally?  According to the Washington Times, “Like so many liberals and ‘progressives,’ the former president does not mean that what he says should be taken literally, or even seriously. Walls, after all, are relative. America can’t have one, but he can. The president lives in an enormous rented mansion behind a brick and stone wall built just for him, and which he has fitted out as the White House in exile, with a staff and lots of electronic communications gear, requiring the seizure of a quarter of a mile of a quiet residential street to be guarded by a Secret Service detail not much smaller than the platoon of heavily armed agents who kept him safe, sound and ready for action at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.”
He even had some advice on child care, “A child on the other side of the border is no less worthy of love and compassion than my own child. We can’t distinguish between in terms of their worth and inherent dignity, and that they’re deserving of shelter and love and education and opportunity.”
This from a man who Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, just revealed directed Customs and Border Protection to release 16 members of the remarkably brutal MS-13 gang, freed to look at will for opportunities to kill and plunder.  “[The federal authorities] apprehended them, knew they were MS-13 gang members, and they processed them into our communities,” the senator told his committee.  How does this help provide safety for American children when these gang members terrorize our schools and communities?
These globalists are more interested in advancing their agenda than in protecting America and its citizens.
According to one of their minions, a senior judge on the far-left Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, “Judges are humiliated and dehumanized whenever they must enforce the nation’s immigration laws.”  Judges are humiliated when they have to enforce laws?  What kind of tin hat wearing alternate reality is this puffed-up self-anointed Carter appointed king in a black robe coming from?  What set this ruler of men in a rage against the machine?
He was unable to block the orderly repatriation of an illegal immigrant who has two drunk driving convictions, plus a U.S. wife and three children.  The outraged jurist complained, “We are unable to prevent [Andres] Magana Ortiz’s removal, yet it is contrary to the values of this nation and its legal system.”  In his blast from on high he continued, “We are compelled to deny Mr. Magana Ortiz’s request for a stay of removal because we do not have the authority to grant it. We are not, however, compelled to find the government’s action in this case fair or just. … The government’s decision to remove Magana Ortiz diminishes not only our country but our courts, which are supposedly dedicated to the pursuit of justice. Magana Ortiz and his family are in truth not the only victims. Among the others are judges who, forced to participate in such inhumane acts, suffer a loss of dignity and humanity as well. I concur as a judge, but as a citizen I do not.”
This judge is a perfect representative of the Deep State, the permanent government.  They don’t care who is elected or what the people may want.  They have their agenda and they’re going to continue to try and shove it down our throat until we either accept it or choke.
A president in exile leading a resistance movement against the man elected to succeed him, a Deep State of bureaucrats dedicated to the disruption of the government they are sworn to serve.  What are we to do?
Why worry when we can pray?
Keep the faith.  Keep the peace.  We shall overcome.

By Dr. Robert Owens on June 1, 2017 American politics, Dr. Robert Owens

American Spymaster and Election Hacker Revealed
For months we’ve heard endless reports concerning the supposed ties between the Trump campaign and the Darth Vader of the progressive’s nightmares, Putin’s Russia.  The thin gruel of this plot has swirled from the swamp in DC through the megaphone of the ABC CBS NBC PBS CNN MSNBC Cartel until one would think every day Americans out here in fly-over country were actually thinking about it.
Finally after months of exhaustive research the spy-master of the most extensive surveillance campaign aimed at Americans can be revealed.  The one man who used every avenue possible to invade the privacy of American citizens in History has had the mask of denial ripped away.  Besides Hillary and the DNC rigging the primaries to stop Bernie who actually tried to use illegally obtained information to influence the presidential election in 2016?
The Obama Administration routinely spied on Americans.  According to John Solomon and Sara Carter of CIRCA:
The National Security Agency under former President Barack Obama routinely violated American privacy protections while scouring through overseas intercepts and failed to disclose the extent of the problems until the final days before Donald Trump was elected president last fall, according to once top-secret documents that chronicle some of the most serious constitutional abuses to date by the U.S. intelligence community.
More than 5 percent, or one out of every 20 searches seeking upstream Internet data on Americans inside the NSA’s so-called Section 702 database violated the safeguards Obama and his intelligence chiefs vowed to follow in 2011, according to one classified internal report reviewed by Circa.
The Obama administration self-disclosed the problems at a closed-door hearing Oct. 26 before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that set off alarm. Trump was elected less than two weeks later.
The normally supportive court censured administration officials, saying the failure to disclose the extent of the violations earlier amounted to an “institutional lack of candor” and that the improper searches constituted a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue,” according to a recently unsealed court document dated April 26, 2017.
The admitted violations undercut one of the primary defenses that the intelligence community and Obama officials have used in recent weeks to justify their snooping into incidental NSA intercepts about Americans.
According to Paul Sperry of the New York Post the Obama Admiration used its control of America’s vast intelligence gathering apparatus in an attempt to hack the election.  While the show trials in Congress continue to build a paint-by-numbers PR case about Russians acting in collusion with the Trump campaign those who really tried to subvert the electoral process are being protected by the same political hacks running the phony investigations.
As Sperry reveals and relates:
New revelations have surfaced that the Obama administration abused intelligence during the election by launching a massive domestic spy campaign that included snooping on Trump officials.
The irony is mind-boggling: Targeting political opposition is long a technique of police states like Russia, which Team Obama has loudly condemned for allegedly using its own intelligence agencies to hack into our election.
The revelations, as well as testimony this week from former Obama intel officials, show the extent to which the Obama administration politicized and weaponized intelligence against Americans.
We now know the National Security Agency under President Barack Obama routinely violated privacy protections while snooping through foreign intercepts involving US citizens — and failed to disclose the breaches, prompting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court a month before the election to rebuke.
…
The FISA court called it a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue” that NSA analysts — in violation of a 2011 rule change prohibiting officials from searching Americans’ information without a warrant — “had been conducting such queries in violation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had been previously disclosed to the Court.”
A number of those searches were made from the White House, and included private citizens working for the Trump campaign, some of whose identities were leaked to the media. The revelations earned a stern rebuke from the ACLU and from civil liberties champion Sen. Rand Paul.
We also learned this week that Obama intelligence officials really had no good reason attaching a summary of a dossier on Trump to a highly classified Russia briefing they gave to Obama just weeks before Trump took office.
Under congressional questioning Tuesday, Obama’s CIA chief John Brennan said the dossier did not “in any way” factor into the agency’s assessment that Russia interfered in the election. Why not? Because as Obama intel czar James Clapper earlier testified, “We could not corroborate the sourcing.”
But that didn’t stop Brennan in January from attaching its contents to the official report for the president. He also included the unverified allegations in the briefing he gave Hill Democrats.
In so doing, Brennan virtually guaranteed that it would be leaked, which it promptly was.
In short, Brennan politicized raw intelligence. In fact, he politicized the entire CIA.
Langley vets say Brennan was the most politicized director in the agency’s history. Former CIA field operations officer Gene Coyle said Brennan was “known as the greatest sycophant in the history of the CIA, and a supporter of Hillary Clinton before the election. I find it hard to put any real credence in anything that the man says.”
Coyle noted that Brennan broke with his predecessors who stayed out of elections. Several weeks before the vote, he made it very clear he was pulling for Hillary. His deputy Mike Morell even came out and publicly endorsed her in the New York Times, claiming Trump was an “unwitting agent” of Moscow.
Brennan isn’t just a Democrat. He’s a radical leftist who in 1980 — during the height of the Cold War --voted for a Communist Party candidate for president.
When Brennan rants about the dangers of strongman Vladimir Putin targeting our elections and subverting our democratic process, does he not catch at least a glimpse of his own reflection?
What he and the rest of the Obama gang did has inflicted more damage on the integrity of our electoral process than anything the Russians have done.
How does all this surveillance keep us safe?  In Great Britain where there is more government surveillance than in any other western state it didn’t help stop the recent Manchester bomber.  According to press reports, he was known to the British intelligence services, he had traveled and possibly trained in bomb-making in Libya and Syria, his family members warned the authorities that he was dangerous, and he even flew terrorist flags over his house. What more did he need to do to signal that he may be a problem?
Of course here in America our government’s watchers are going to do it better ……. of course they will… ;–)
My question is: As they are watching us who watches them besides secret courts that report only to the perpetually re-elected guardians of the dysfunctional democratic process in a well-functioning oligarchy?
Never mind the facts.  Don’t pay any attention to who did what.  Ignore an ex-president operating a deep state government in exile while orchestrating the Resist 45 Movement.

By Dr. Robert Owens

Are Democrats Smarter Than Republicans?
I have asked myself this question many times.  Have recent events changed my mind?
The headline blares, “Nunes steps aside from Russia probe.”  Why?  As Nunes puts it, “Several leftwing activist groups have filed accusations against me with the Office of Congressional Ethics.  The charges are entirely false and politically motivated, and are being leveled just as the American people are beginning to learn the truth about the improper unmasking of the identities of U.S. citizens and other abuses of power.”
Do you think if this was House Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Democrat Adam Schiffserving as the head of the committee he would step aside?  No way.  If this was going on against a Democrat the entire Progressive establishment would be attacking the Ethics Committee for even accepting such accusations.
In a second example let’s look at the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions.  He recuses himself from the Russian witch hunt over non-issues.  Does anyone remember that Obama’s last AG Loretta Lynch meeting with Ex-President Clinton on an airport in Arizona while her department was conducting a criminal investigation of his wife?   Did she recuse herself?  Of course not only Republicans are held to those standards.
Or look at the fake news tsunami about Russian meddling in our recent election.  After all this inquiry there is no evidence to support it.  WIKI Leaks has provided documents that show our own intelligence organizations routinely hack computers and make it look like the Russians did it.  And besides as I have been pointing out all along if the Russians did hack the election and Hillary won the popular vote who was the recipient of any Russian help?  Now it comes out that President Obama’s political hatchet woman Susan Rice was the one unmasking people from the Trump campaign and transition team in broad sweep intel gatherings.  So it looks like if any government was trying to interfere in a fair election it was ours.
And yet the media drum beat and the hearings, investigations, and charges continue.  If this was happening to a Democrat, say to President Obama what would we hear?   The media megaphone would be blaring day and night that it was a racially motivated witch hunt.  And unlike the Republicans who have some of the leaders of their party in and out of government and those in the media joining in the attacks in a similar situation the Democrats would circle the wagons and defend the attacked 24/7.
Like Charley Brown trying to kick the football over and over again only to have Lucy pull it away; each time the Democrats keep running the same play and the Republicans keep falling for it.  This brings us to the question of the day, “Are Democrats smarter than Republicans?”
I was a fourth generation Republican who cut my teeth in Nixon’s first presidential campaign back in 1960 and then in Barry Goldwater’s failed Presidential bid.  I worked for Goldwater, Reagan, and all the following Republican flag wavers who tried to rally the country to a return to limited government, personal liberty, and economic freedom.  That is I did until Trent Lott’s Republican Senate Majority gave us the impeachment debacle and the explosion of government growth and spending under Hastert, Lott, and Bush.  When the Republican Senate refused to impeach President Clinton for crimes he later admitted and when they and their House brethren became Democrat Lite as the party of power, I mailed my membership card to the party that was no longer the Grand Old Party of my great grandfather and became an Independent.
For most of my life I was a party man: accepting some things I didn’t agree with for the greater good of electing a party with a platform I could agree with.  However, once it became apparent that as far as the budget went we had elected the foxes to watch the hen house, that the conservative social agenda received a tip-of-the-hat during elections followed by no action, and that the only victims of the impeachment were those brave enough to bring the charges the scales fell from my eyes.  Once I saw that the Republicans had lost their moorings and were swilling at the public trough, I realized the platform we conservatives battle so hard for and hold so dear is merely a mirage held in front of social and fiscal conservatives to keep them loyal to a Party captured by the Progressives.
Back in the Dream Time, when my mind was still locked in the glow of Ronald Reagan and all his example and message meant to America, even then I wondered, “What’s wrong with these leaders of ours?  Why do the Democrats always seem to outsmart them at every turn?”
Even Reagan, the best of the best, was hoodwinked by Tip O’Neal in the amnesty bargain: we would grant amnesty and then seal the border.  The problem is the illegal immigrants got the amnesty; however, America’s border was never sealed.  He also signed several tax deals with the Democratic majority.  We the People lost many deductions in exchange for lower rates. The deductions never came back even though the rates started rising again as soon as theGipper said good night and George the First forgot to read his own lips.
George Bush the Elder was out maneuvered by the Progressives so many times that 20% of his base ran to Perot opening the door for Clinton and the first attempt to ram national health care down America’s throat.  That time they overplayed their hand and the last great strategist among the Republicans, Newt Gingrich, was able to sell a Contract with America and bring the first Republican majority in Congress in 40 years.
Newt kept the promises and brought some fiscal sanity back to Washington.  Within a few short years the Republican led Congress ended welfare as we had known it for generations andbalanced the budget.  Unfortunately the Party of Lincoln then nominated someone who campaigned as if he had voted for Lincoln.  The 1996 Republican campaign would have had to improve several thousand percent to make it to dull.  Suddenly, with an assist from the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media it was Clinton, who had been dragged kicking and screaming to the benefit and spending cutting table, who was the author of everything positive Congress had accomplished.  The Republicans had been outmaneuvered and outsmarted again.
According to every one of the serial re-counts Bush the younger won Florida and legitimately the presidential race of 2000.  Yet, to this day people talk of him being selected not elected. After the dastardly deeds of 9-11 the rhetorically-challenged George captured the hearts of America and the admiration of the Western world by taking a bullhorn and talking to a crowd at ground zero.  Yet by fighting and winning America’s first preemptive war and then losing the peace through the lack of planning he soon lost the PR campaign which led to the Pelosi-Reid Congress in 2006 and eventually to the absolute triumph of Progressivism in 2008.

Once their secular messiah was enthroned at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue the Progressives with their filibuster proof majority took the reins of single-party rule and imposed their radical agenda to transform America into a Nanny-state based upon the re-distribution of wealth. This wanton destruction of the traditional American society based on limited government and free enterprise sparked a vast rebellion of the silent majority resulting in the teanami of 2010which brought a Republican majority back to the People’s House and an expanded minority to the Senate.
And what is the first thing these political savants do?  They reaffirm the same tired leadership and strike a deal that anyone who was paying attention could see was tailor made to save the discredited Obama presidency and set the stage for him to follow in Mr. Clinton’s footsteps taking credit for anything good the historic election might have made possible.  What were these so-called leaders thinking?  They turned the victory of the grassroots into a capitulation to the elites.  Not only did they sign a deal that extended uncertainty and raised estate taxes, they gave the Administration cover for a stealth stimulus filled with porkulous pay-offs designed to help re-elect the President.
Along comes 2012 and the Republican establishment and their friends in the Progressive Media engineer the nomination of the one man who couldn’t beat the worst president in American History with the worst economy since 1932.  They surrender the issue of a massively unpopular Obamacare by nominating the author of its prototype.  Mr. Romney spends the last debate agreeing with the President’s handling of foreign policy and ignoring the raging controversy over the debacle in Benghazi.  If he didn’t throw the election he tossed it away.
Then came Trump, he wins fair and square yet he is illegitimate.  There is no evidence of any collusion with the Russians but the seriousness of the charges demand an investigation as is the Democrat standard operating procedure.  All of this smoke and mirrors might easily be a cover so that no one gets to investigate the real scandal, that the Obama administration spied on and distributed the findings in an attempt to sabotage the incoming Trump.  And the Republicans are either right in there working with the Democrats, they recuse themselves, or they’re merely ineffective in dispersing the smoke and revealing the truth.
So, “Are Democrats smarter than Republicans?”  The answer is they aren’t.  It isn’t a matter of intelligence it’s a matter of people with dedication to something larger than themselves, as opposed to people with dedication to seeing themselves as something larger than they are.
The leadership of the Democrat Party is composed of committed radical Progressives.  They have a long term agenda to transform America into a socialist welfare state with an unlimited government, and they never lose sight of that goal.  They’re willing to commit political suicide, or more accurately they’re willing to encourage their follow travelers who do not occupy safe seats to commit political suicide usually with pay off jobs in government agencies.  They never take their eyes off the ball.  They’re constantly pushing to move closer to the goal line even if it’s one inch at a time.  And after the debacle that was Hillary they are warming to the idea of allowing an outright Socialist to become the leader and agenda driver of their Party.

They say a leopard can’t change his spots and at least the sheep’s clothing is falling off the Faux Socialists who call themselves Democrats.  It is interesting to remember that the Communist Party USA went all in for Obama and Clinton.  Why run your own candidate when one of the major parties is doing it for you.  These are some dedicated community organizers who aim at nothing less than fundamentally transforming America.
By comparison, the leadership of the Republicans is composed of professional politicians. They’re pragmatists who do whatever they have to do and say whatever they have to say to retain their seats, their power, and their perks.  They believe the inside the beltway press who tell them how visionary they are to compromise, losing sight of those back home in fly-over country who instead believed the campaign promises and expect their representatives to stand up for principles.
The Party of Lincoln over-and-over chooses to be on the receiving end of Pickett’s Chargeinstead of behind the spit-rail fence firing point blank as their enemy wastes itself in a senseless assault against an immovable barrier.  The Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the Presidency.  They could be that immovable barrier holding back the advancing forces of bankruptcy and collapse.  Instead the Progressives of the right are once again embracing the frivolous and spurious attacks of the Left against anyone who is really trying to lead away from the super state.   Soon they will join the Progressives of left in a bi-partisan campaign to continue the spending, increase the debt, and fool the public.
Paraphrasing the first Republican President, Historian Will Durant once wisely observed, “It may be true that you can’t fool all the people all the time, but you can fool enough of them to rule a large country.”
Looking at the question which is the title of this essay, “Are Democrats smarter than Republicans” over many years of pondering this question, I haven’t changed my mind. Singleness of purpose and focusing on a goal will make one appear smarter than someone who is merely in it for what they can get.  In other words, people who are dedicated to achieving long-term goals who have the ability to delay gratification will always trump self-serving pragmatists who can see no further than the feathers in their own nest.

By Dr. Robert Owens
State Department spokesman John Kirby acknowledged Wednesday that Islamic State terrorists are trying to mingle with refugee populations overseas in the hopes of making it to the U.S. posing as a refugee.

New York bombing suspect Ahmad Khan Rahami said he received instructions from 'terrorist leaders... to attack non-believers'

5000 ISIS terrorists sneak into Europe disguised as ‘refugees’
ISIS plotting terror attacks in America 'THIS YEAR' after jihadis 'exploit refugee crisis'
ISLAMIC State (ISIS) jihadis are plotting to launch terror attacks in America this year after exploiting the refugee crisis, intelligence chiefs have warned.
Islamic State operating in Mexico just 8 miles from U.S. border
Citing sources that include a “Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector,” the conservative watchdog group reported that the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, is organizing only a few miles from El Paso, Texas, in the Anapra neighborhood of Juárez and in Puerto Palomas.
 
America’s Trojan War combines gut wrenching realism and fast paced action to make this feel like it was ripped from the morning’s headlines.
Lisa Billingham and Sargent Bushings rushed into the building firing into the faces of the enemy.  Hundreds and soon thousands of police, firemen, and civilians poured into the buildings of St Elizabeth Hospital.  They shot anything that moved.  By force of numbers they pushed the defenders back from the windows and doors.  Room by room sometimes desk by desk the fire fights raged leaving dead, wounded and dying scattered in every conceivable pose, piled on the floor, slumped over desks and chairs, and half in and half out of doors and windows. It was no exaggeration to say the building was littered with bodies.  Still the Americans in their righteous anger assaulted the enemy with a ferocity they had never imagined.

By Dr. Robert Owens
I have often heard it said that the universe is so large that anything we can imagine exists somewhere.
​
We wouldn’t have had the 16th amendment. Therefore we would still have a land without personal income tax and the Federal Government would have lived on fees and tariffs as it always did before the Progressives secured a source of money large enough to spend us into oblivion.

An astrophysicist, Ranga-Ram Chary at the European Space Agency's Planck Space Telescope data center at CalTech says he may have found evidence of alternate or parallel universes by looking back in time to just after the Big Bang more than thirteen billion years ago.
Then there is always the possible parallel universe of dark matter. As researchers learn more about dark matter's complexities, it seems possible that our galaxy lives on top of a shadow galaxy without us even knowing it.
I have often heard it said the universe is so large that anything we can imagine exists somewhere. Taking that as a starting point for a flight of fancy, let’s imagine a parallel universe without Progressives.
We wouldn’t have had the 16th amendment. Therefore we would still have a land without personal income tax and the Federal Government would have lived on fees and tariffs as it always did before the Progressives secured a source of money large enough to spend us into oblivion.

We wouldn’t have had the 17th amendment and the senators would still be selected by the State legislators. This was one of the checks and balances the Founders embedded in the original Constitution to protect the federal nature of the Federal Government. The House represents the people and the Senate was supposed to represent the States.
We wouldn’t have had The Creature from Jekyll Island, the Federal Reserve System, and America’s representative of the international banking cartel. Without the Fed to mismanage the money supply there would never have been the banking crisis of the early 1930s. This is crisis that set the stage for the re-boot of America’s free economy as a centrally-planned command and control machine used to transform every sector of American life.
We wouldn’t have had Woodrow Wilson to take us into the War to End all Wars that ended up building up the three largest empires in the world and setting the stage of WWII.  

​We wouldn’t have had FDR to impose fascist economic forms on America extending what would have been a recession into the Great Depression

​We wouldn’t have had JFK to lose his nerve in 1961. Thus the Castro brothers and their murderous savagery would have fallen with the successful Bay of Pigs invasion.
We wouldn’t have had LBJ to build a Great Society safety net that has become a hammock entrapping uncounted millions and generations in the snare of dependency.
We wouldn’t have had BHO to fundamentally transform America into a falling empire and a soon to be third world backwater.
And we wouldn’t have HRC campaigning for president as Mrs. Santa Clause promising to give everyone who doesn’t work everything they want while she seeks to take the Second Amendment from the rest of us.  
Think about this; look at how our government treats citizens now as taxing units or dependent voting units and we are armed to the teeth.  Imagine how they will treat us once we are disarmed.  Many believe the Second Amendment makes all the others possible. 

By Dr. Robert Owens
The Evansville Bar Association in its annual recognition of Constitution Day in 2015 summed it up well; 
Although the terms "Separation of Powers" and "Checks and Balances" are not found in the Constitution, these principles are key to its vitality. As George Washington wrote in February of 1788, the two great "pivots upon which the whole machine must move" are: (1) "the general Government is not invested with more Powers than are indispensably necessary to perform the functions of a good Government[,]" and (2) "these Powers are so distributed among the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches, that [the Government] can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy or any other despotic or oppressive form, so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the People." As recently as 2011, the Supreme Court affirmed that these principles were "intended, in part, to protect each branch of government from incursion by the others. The structural principles secured by the separation of powers protect the individual as well.

Congress has abdicated its powers to unelected bureaucrats and the courts have decided that is the order of the day.  Generation Opportunity covers this well when they say; 
One of the reasons that elections are such so important is because legislative representatives are responsible to create federal laws that impact every one of their constituents.
This is not a task to be taken lightly, which is why voters must dedicate time to research candidates before heading to the voting booth. But few people realize that there are unelected individuals who create regulations that govern everything from what type of light bulb you are allowed to use, as well as how much water your toilet may flush. According to an article published by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), no one is entirely sure how many government agencies actually exist, not even the government knows the exact number.
For instance, in the appendix of the Administrative Conference of the United States, there are 115 agencies listed with a disclaimer saying, “[T]here is no authoritative list of government agencies.”
The federal government has grown so large that no one can even keep track of it anymore. Worse still, each of these agencies are filled with unelected people who take on legislative authority to interpret laws passed by Congress.
Although Congress is prohibited from “delegating” its legislative function to another branch of government, Courts have consistently held that federal agencies may create their own rules as long as an “intelligible” principle can be discerned from the original statute in question.
In other words, if Congress passes a law that regulates a particular industry or action, unelected federal bureaucrats are given almost unchecked power to create whichever rules (or crimes associated with the conduct in question) that they please.
Here’s an example: When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, it mandated that certain environmental standards must be imposed on the states, but it hardly clarified what those standards were, or how they were to be enforced.
One of the components of the Act mandated states to establish a permit program that regulates, “new or modified major stationary sources” of air pollution. That seems simple enough, except that Congress never properly defined what qualified as a “stationary source.”
Therefore, the Environmental Protection Agency was left with the task of defining what a “stationary source” meant. Additionally, the original legislation never detailed what the penalty would be for breaking any of the statutes created by the new amendments, leaving it open to interpretation by the EPA.
This predicament led to the 1984 landmark case of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., where the Supreme Court held that federal agencies have authority to interpret statutes which they are in charge of administering.
This meant that the EPA now had legal authority to determine what would be considered a “stationary source” of air pollution.
Since the Chevron Doctrine applies to all government agencies, the opportunities for abuse are endless. Government is only legitimate when it derives its powers from the consent of the governed. When we give legislative powers to unelected government officials we completely disregard the core American belief of consensual representation.
In other words we elect legislators to make laws and they make general laws like, “We want clean water,” and then they let unelected bureaucrats fill in the blanks with the force of law.  

Here is how it works.  Everyone wants clean water so the legislators pass their “We want clean water,” law and they come back to their constituents and campaign on “I brought you clean water.”  Then the EPA issues a regulation that says you can’t build on wet lands.  The EPA gets to decide what wet lands means which consequently gives them De Facto control over any piece of property they say is a wet land.  Then when voters complain to their congressional representative, who voted for the law and bragged about it, that they can’t build their house on a lot that is obviously dry the legislator becomes indignant.  They tell their constituents, “We’ll just see about this!” Then they have an aide send a strongly worded letter to the EPA that makes no difference whatsoever. 
Problem solved.  Pat the denizens from fly-over country on the head and leave the matter in the hands of the commiczars who have inherited the rule of what was once a representative republic.  This way the hack can get back to his real job of raising money and getting re-elected.
This abdication of responsibility on the part of the legislature is the root cause of our problems because it has led to or facilitated the rise of the imperial presidency wherein many presidents have expanded the power of the executive until today we have an elected monarch who rules by decree unchallenged by Congress and unfettered by the will of the people.
Although the imperial presidency by no means began with the present occupant of the White House, to many Barack Obama has pushed the envelope beyond any discernable constitutional limits and has become the prime example of this phenomenon.
According to the Christian Science Monitor;
President Obama’s use of executive action to get around congressional gridlock is unparalleled in modern times, some scholars say. But to liberal activists, he’s not going far enough.
Obama, a former constitutional law lecturer, was once skeptical of the aggressive use of presidential power. During the 2008 campaign, he accused President George W. Bush of regularly circumventing Congress. Yet as president, Obama has grown increasingly bold in his own use of executive action, at times to controversial effect.
The president (or his administration) has unilaterally changed elements of the Affordable Care Act (ACA); declared an anti-gay-rights law unconstitutional; lifted the threat of deportation for an entire class of undocumented immigrants; bypassed Senate confirmation of controversial nominees; waived compliance requirements in education law; and altered the work requirements under welfare reform. This month, the Obama administration took the highly unusual step of announcing that it will recognize gay marriages performed in Utah – even though Utah itself says it will not recognize them while the issue is pending in court.
Early in his presidency, Obama also expanded presidential warmaking powers, surveillance of the American public, and extrajudicial drone strikes on alleged terrorists outside the United States, including Americans – going beyond Mr. Bush's own global war on terror following 9/11. But more recently, he has flexed his executive muscle more on domestic policy.
In the process, Obama's claims of executive authority have infuriated opponents, while emboldening supporters to demand more on a range of issues, from immigration and gay rights to the minimum wage and Guantánamo Bay prison camp.
To critics, Obama is the ultimate "imperial president," willfully violating the Constitution to further his goals, having failed to convince Congress of the merits of his arguments. To others, he is exercising legitimate executive authority in the face of an intransigent Congress and in keeping with the practices of past presidents.
It also leads to the tyranny of the courts.  Unelected lawyers with life tenure decide what is and what is not constitutional often with the vaguest references to the Constitution itself.  Disregarding what are clearly enunciated rights such as the one to keep and bear arms while finding such nonexistent rights such as the right to dispose of unborn children.  The Justices of the Supreme Court have abrogated unto themselves unlimited power to turn our Constitution which was supposed to be written in stone into a living letter written in sand.  Or as one Chief justice said, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes once said, "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is." Or as the website Western Journalism describes it;
Our federal judiciary has become, arguably and disturbingly, an oligarchy. When they rule on the “constitutionality” of an issue, it is assumed to be the final say in whether a vote of Congress or the vote of the people via referendum or initiative is legitimized or annulled. This is not how the Supreme Court and its substrata of appellate courts were intended to operate, nor is it de facto the way it should be.
The federal judiciary, as it has evolved, has unchecked and unlimited power over the nation by either of the other branches–the executive or the legislative–or even the people. Its members are not accountable to the citizenry, since most of their appointments are for life, and they cannot be removed from the bench by a vote of the people they purportedly serve. Their ruminations and the results of their decisions are insular, and they often trump the will of the people with regard to key social issues. Their decisions are presumed to be final, even though they may be at odds with the democratic majority of our citizens.
Herein lies the fundamental problem about the present construct of our federal judiciary as it has evolved since the founding. If, as stated in the 10th Amendment, all “rights and powers” not specifically itemized in the Constitution are held by the people collectively or by the states, what right does a court have to negate the will of the people? As it relates especially to key cultural issues like abortion, public religious displays, and definitions of marriage, should not the final court be the court of public opinion, rather than an oligarchy of judges insulated from, and not accountable to, the citizenry? In most of these cases, state courts have ruled, and appeals are then made to the federal judiciary.
Thomas Jefferson portended this judicial despotism: “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.”
These situations exist because Congress abdicates its authority to unelected bureaucrats of the federal nomenclature, it refuses to stand up to the runaway executives and refuses to reign in the Supreme Court.  

The first could be accomplished by passing a law rescinding the ability of bureaucracies to issue regulations that have the force of law without congressional approval.
The second could be accomplished as they were with President Nixon, hearings which could lead to impeachment.
And the third is constitutionally provided for in Article 3, Section 2, Clause 2 which states, “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”  Congress should exercise its power to limit the jurisdiction of the courts. The Constitution provides that Congress is authorized to establish those federal courts subordinate to the Supreme Court and set forth their jurisdiction. Congress also has the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and regulate its activities. Accordingly, Congress should exercise this authority to restrain an activist judiciary.
If Congress would step up and be what we elect them to be We the People could once again become more than just an empty phrase from History in a discarded document that once sought to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.  If our representatives will represent us instead of themselves and their cronies we would find that the solutions to our broken institutions are in the Constitution.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens [email protected]  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens
Excerpt:
How could any of this fail to end America’s 240 year old experiment in human freedom?  
Tags:
Congressional authority, Dr. Owens, imperial presidency, judicial tyranny, constitution, supreme court, balance of powers, checks and balances.

By Dr. Robert Owens

I was raised by people who believed in “My country right or wrong.”  I was taught that America never started a war and never lost a war.  Reading Burry My Heart at Wounded Knee and an honest appraisal of the War of 1812 disabused me of those two notions.  While the jingoist attitude of blind acceptance and unreflective loyalty and unquestioning support for a sacred homeland are not descriptive of my life I am devoted to the enlightenment ideas enshrined in the Constitution.  
I am a vocal proponent of the nation founded on the proposition that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.  I am a proud supporter of the federal republic founded in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.
I am an avowed non-interventionist capitalist who believes passionately in individual liberty, personal freedom, and economic opportunity.  I was a Republican all my life, working my first campaign ringing door bells for Nixon in 1960, supporting Goldwater, Reagan for Governor and then for president in 1976, 1980, and 84.  
George H.W. Bush with his compassionate conservatism and new world order turned me off.  Bob “It’s my Turn” Dole discouraged me and after the Contract with America Congress veered off the rails and started pushing bigger government and crony capitalism I quit the party and became an independent.  George the Second pushed me over the edge.  I could no longer consider myself a Conservative because there was nothing left to conserve, so I began to style myself as a radical who believes in a return to limited government, individual liberty, personal freedom, and economic opportunity.
The Clinton interlude between the Bush bookends and the Obama nation I have viewed as akin to the Vichy regime in France during WW II.  They were and are mere figureheads for the multinational corporations and international organizations to which they surrendered our independence doing their best to institutionalize the Corporate State.
I have long believed and advocated for the following policies.  
Moratoriums on all immigration until those who are already here are assimilated.   Initiate policies which will induce those who are here illegally to self-deport.  These policies would include a cut off of public assistance and an E-verify law with teeth meaning significant fines for people who employ illegals and incarceration for those who have multiple offenses.   In foreign policy, resigning as the policeman of the world by ending our far-flung system of bases in more than a hundred countries, leaving Europe and Korea to defend themselves, bringing our troops home, securing the border and our defenses with the strongest military in the world and stop intervening in places that are not in our national interest.
Yes, I know that these proposals will be called racist, xenophobic and anti-American by the open borders clique; however, to quote Ronaldus Magnus, “A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.”  They will also be opposed by the neo-con hawks as isolationist.  I stand with Ron Paul when he says, “The Founders and all the early presidents argued the case for non-intervention overseas, with the precise goals of avoiding entangling alliances and not involving our people in foreign wars unrelated to our security.”
Yes, I know tariffs will make prices rise for many goods.  However, I also know that we need to rebuild our industrial base if we are to remain an independent nation capable of providing jobs for our people that support a middleclass lifestyle and a nation that can provide for its own defense.  Yes, I know that a non-interventionist resignation from being the policeman of the world is portrayed as a retreat and as abdicating our leadership of the world.  I call it jettisoning the empire to save the republic.

These positions have been heretical within the globalist interventionist neo-con Republican Party of Bush, McCain, Krauthammer, and the National Review.  However, today is a new day and perhaps there is a chance to right the Ship of State and resurrect the greatest experiment in human freedom in History before we plunge into the dustbin of History as another centralized collectivist utopia that will inevitably end up a dystopian nightmare.
Now we face a choice of historic proportions.  Do we want Hillary “The Nail in Our Coffin” Clinton to complete the transfer of American sovereignty to international globalist cabals such as the WTO and the UN?  Or are we willing to vote for the first candidate since Reagan with the courage to even say, “America First”?
I am still an independent.  I will not rejoin the Republican Party unless and until it has been purged of its globalist leadership.  However, I have waited my entire life to hear a politician say what The Donald said in his speech of June 28, 2016 “Declaring America's Economic Independence.”  In this speech he outlines a program I can endorse 100%.  
Mr. Trump said in that speech, 
This wave of globalization has wiped out our middle class. 
It doesn't have to be this way. We can turn it all around - and we can turn it around fast.
But if we're going to deliver real change, we're going to have to reject the campaign of fear and intimidation being pushed by powerful corporations, media elites, and political dynasties.
The people who rigged the system for their benefit will do anything - and say anything - to keep things exactly as they are.
The people who rigged the system are supporting Hillary Clinton because they know as long as she is in charge nothing will ever change.
The inner cities will remain poor.
The factories will remain closed.
The borders will remain open.
The special interests will remain firmly in control.
Hillary Clinton and her friends in global finance want to scare America into thinking small - and they want to scare the American people out of voting for a better future.
My campaign has the opposite message.
I want you to imagine how much better your life can be if we start believing in America again.
I want you to imagine how much better our future can be if we declare independence from the elites who've led us to one financial and foreign policy disaster one after another.
This is the message I have been waiting for all my life.  This message is clear and direct.  Trump often speaks off the top of his head.  He speaks his mind and often says things which offend the politically correct media and by extension those who slavishly believe and follow the Progressive’s multi-mouthed Pravda.  However this speech was scripted.  He used a teleprompter to deliver it and its text has been released as an official campaign document.
I know that in the divided America of the 21st century many who have followed the History of the Future for years will be angry with what I have to say next. Some may be surprised and some may be disappointed.  However I have to do what I believe is the best for my country.  Therefore, I have decided to endorse and support Donald Trump.  Some may say you can’t believe what he says.  A man I greatly respect says, “All politicians lie.  The good ones do it convincingly.”  That may be true.
Just as Eve did not sin because she believed the serpent and just as if you donate to a charity that you honestly believe will do good and they waste the money that is not your responsibility that is on them.  I believe Donald Trump.  I believe he honestly wants to make America great again, and I am 100% for that.
While I encourage everyone to read the entire speech or listen to it on YouTube and it is too long to include verbatim in this article I want to end by sharing his trade program for rebuilding America.
A Trump Administration will change our failed trade policy - quickly
Here are 7 steps I would pursue right away to bring back our jobs.
One: I am going to withdraw the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which has not yet been ratified.
Two: I'm going to appoint the toughest and smartest trade negotiators to fight on behalf of American workers.
Three: I'm going to direct the Secretary of Commerce to identify every violation of trade agreements a foreign country is currently using to harm our workers. I will then direct all appropriate agencies to use every tool under American and international law to end these abuses.
Four: I'm going tell our NAFTA partners that I intend to immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal for our workers. And I don't mean just a little bit better, I mean a lot better. If they do not agree to a renegotiation, then I will submit notice under Article 2205 of the NAFTA agreement that America intends to withdraw from the deal.
Five: I am going to instruct my Treasury Secretary to label China a currency manipulator. Any country that devalues their currency in order to take advantage of the United States will be met with sharply
Six: I am going to instruct the U.S. Trade Representative to bring trade cases against China, both in this country and at the WTO. China's unfair subsidy behavior is prohibited by the terms of its entrance to the WTO, and I intend to enforce those rules.

Seven: If China does not stop its illegal activities, including its theft of American trade secrets, I will use every lawful presidential power to remedy trade disputes, including the application of tariffs consistent with Section 201 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
President Reagan deployed similar trade measures when motorcycle and semiconductor imports threatened U.S. industry. His tariff on Japanese motorcycles was 45% and his tariff to shield America’s semiconductor industry was 100%.

Hillary Clinton, and her campaign of fear, will try to spread the lie that these actions will start a trade war. She has it completely backwards.
Hillary Clinton unleashed a trade war against the American worker when she supported one terrible trade deal after another – from NAFTA to China to South Korea.
A Trump Administration will end that war by getting a fair deal for the American people.
The era of economic surrender will finally be over.
A new era of prosperity will finally begin.
America will be independent once more.
Under a Trump Presidency, the American worker will finally have a President who will protect them and fight for them.
We will stand up to trade cheating anywhere and everywhere it threatens an American job.
We will make America the best place in the world to start a business, hire workers, and open a factory.
This includes massive tax reform to lift the crushing burdens on American workers and businesses.
We will also get rid of wasteful rules and regulations which are destroying our job creation capacity.
Many people think that these regulations are an even greater impediment than the fact that we are one of the highest taxed nations in the world.
We are also going to fully capture America’s tremendous energy capacity. This will create vast profits for our workers and begin reducing our deficit. Hillary Clinton wants to shut down energy production and shut down the mines.
A Trump Administration will also ensure that we start using American steel for American infrastructure.
Just like the American steel from Pennsylvania that built the Empire State building.
It will be American steel that will fortify American's crumbling bridges.
It will be American steel that sends our skyscrapers soaring into the sky.
It will be American steel that rebuilds our inner cities.
It will be American hands that remake this country, and it will be American energy - mined from American resources - that powers this country.
It will be American workers who are hired to do the job.
We are going to put American-produced steel back into the backbone of our country. This alone will create massive numbers of jobs.
On trade, on immigration, on foreign policy, we are going to put America First again.
We are going to make America wealthy again.
We are going to reject Hillary Clinton's politics of fear, futility, and incompetence.
We are going to embrace the possibilities of change.
It is time to believe in the future.
It is time to believe in each other.
It is time to Believe In America.
This Is How We Are Going To Make America Great Again – For All Americans.
We Are Going To Make America Great Again For Everyone – Greater Than Ever Before.
I don’t know about anyone else but that is a program I can believe in and one that I believe will lead to a rebirth of the American economy. 
Hopefully I won’t end up living out the words spoken by a character in a book I wrote many years ago who when asked why he supported a disreputable candidate running for president who was a plain-speaking non-politician and the richest man in the world said, “I know he’s a liar but I like what he says.”
So far I like what he says.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com  © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens [email protected]   Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens
Excerpt:
I have waited my entire life to hear a politician say what The Donald said in his speech of 6-28-16
Tags:
Donald Trump, Dr. Robert Owens, the Donald, TPP, NAFTA, World Trade Organization, WTO, America First

By Dr. Robert Owens

Recently I spent some time with a person I respect highly, who is very intelligent, and who has thought about and reached conclusions concerning America’s Constitution.  This person, who is representative of many others, believes that a document written hundreds of years ago is meaningless in today’s America.  He cited the fact that many of the Framers were slave owners, they could not have imagined a nation of hundreds of millions, they could not foresee the technologically rich environment we call home, or the diverse population that now constitutes the body politic. 
None of the things cited above can be refuted because they are all true. 
First of all, what is a constitution?  A constitution organizes, distributes and regulates the power of the state.  A constitution sets out the structure of the state, the major state institutions, and the principles governing their relations with each other and with the state’s citizens.
So, why do we have a written Constitution, and does this written Constitution still matter?  
When the American Revolutionaries broke free from Great Britain they wanted to build their new nation on a solid foundation.  They most assuredly did not want what they had just rebelled against, a monarchy or an unlimited government.
Did the British have a constitution? In the Eighteenth Century just as it is now Britain is unusual in that it has an ‘unwritten’ constitution: unlike the great majority of countries there is no single legal document which sets out in one place the fundamental laws outlining how the state works. Britain’s lack of a ‘written’ constitution can be explained by its history.
In other countries, many of whom have experienced revolution or regime change, it has been necessary to start from scratch or begin from first principles, constructing new state institutions and defining in detail their relations with each other and their citizens. By contrast, the British Constitution has evolved over a long period of time, reflecting the relative stability of the British polity.
 It has never been thought necessary to consolidate the basic building blocks of this order in Britain. What Britain has instead is an accumulation of various statutes, conventions, judicial decisions and treaties which collectively can be referred to as the British Constitution. It is thus more accurate to refer to Britain’s constitution as an ‘uncodified’ constitution, rather than an ‘unwritten’ one.
The British Constitution can be summed up in eight words: What the monarch in Parliament enacts is law. This means that Parliament, using the power of the Crown, enacts law which no other body can challenge. Parliamentary sovereignty is commonly regarded as the defining principle of the British Constitution.
 This is the ultimate lawmaking power vested in a democratically elected Parliament to create or abolish any law. Other core principles of the British Constitution are often thought to include the rule of law, the separation of government into executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and the existence of a unitary state, meaning ultimate power is held by ‘the center’ – the sovereign Westminster Parliament.  In other words there is neither check upon nor balance to the power of the government.  The entire shape, form, and substance of the government can change at any time by a simple majority vote of Parliament.  To sum up: the British Constitution is a living document.

This is what caused the revolution.  If you look at the list of particulars that are in the overlooked or forgotten part of the Declaration of Independence you see that many of these individual charges against the Monarch as the representation of the government are changes made by arbitrary and unilateral acts of Parliament.  
•             He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
•             He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
•             He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
•             He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
•             He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
•             He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time (sic) exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
•             He has endeavoured (sic) to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
•             He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
•             He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
•             He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
•             He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
•             He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
•             He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
 
•             For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us
•             For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States
•             For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world
•             For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent
•             For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury
•             For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
•             For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring (sic) Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
•             For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments
•             For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever
 
 
•             He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
•             He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
•             He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat (sic) the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
•             He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
•             He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured (sic) to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

The colonists tried to follow the procedures as they knew them to find relief within the system.  But they were ignored and baffled as the system kept changing.  They describe their experience dealing with the shifting sands of their revered living document in the following words.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish (sic) brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
It was because of this failed effort to deal with a system that has no solid structure, a system that can change at the will of a simple majority that the Framers were determined to set our new nation on the solid rock of a written constitution.  What did the Founders and Framers have to say?
George Washington said, “The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution, which at any time exists, ‘till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. … If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”
Thomas Jefferson said, “Our peculiar security is in possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction. … If it is, then we have no Constitution.”
James Madison said, “Can it be of less consequence that the meaning of a Constitution should be fixed and known, than a meaning of a law should be so?”
This is what we were founded upon and this is the philosophical underpinning for the originalist view of the constitution as championed by the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
What do the leading lights of the living document side of the argument have to say?
Woodrow Wilson said, “Living political constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice. Society is a living organism and must obey the laws of life, not of mechanics; it must develop.  All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when ‘development,’ ‘evolution,’ is the scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.”
FDR said, “The United States Constitution has proved itself the most marvelously elastic compilation of rules of government ever written.”
Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter said, “The words of the Constitution … are so unrestricted by their intrinsic meaning or by their history or by tradition or by prior decisions that they leave the individual Justice free, if indeed they do not compel him, to gather meaning not from reading the Constitution but from reading life.” 
Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall said, “I cannot accept this invitation [to celebrate the bicentennial of the Constitution], for I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention … To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start.”

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia summed up the end result of more than a century of Progressive constitutional stretching.  “If we’re picking people to draw out of their own conscience and experience a ‘new’ Constitution, we should not look principally for good lawyers. We should look to people who agree with us. When we are in that mode, you realize we have rendered the Constitution useless.”
Or to put it another way the Progressive’s living document has gone a long way to changing the Constitution from something carved in stone to a mirage written in the sand.  So why do we have a written constitution?  In my opinion we need a written constitution so that the government cannot change the social contract with the wave of its hand or the passage of thousand page bills no one even reads.
So why do we have a written constitution?
To keep demagogues and tyrants from arbitrarily changing the rules by which we live.  If you think this has worked see my book The Constitution Failed.  As a professor of Political Science and as the Director of one of the largest Political Science Departments at any university I have long advocated that the study of the Constitution should be moved from Political Science to History because it has become merely an historical document and now has little to do with how our country is administered by the political class.
Does it still matter?  Only if the citizens of this nation have the fortitude to rise up and demand that it matters.
Keep the faith.  Keep the peace.  We shall overcome.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens [email protected]   
Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens
Excerpt: 
When the American Revolutionaries broke free from Great Britain they wanted to build their new nation on a solid foundation.  
Tags:
Living document, Dr. Robert Owens, the Constitution, original intent, originalist view, Antonin Scalia, progressive agenda, socialist agenda, Obama’s agenda 

Bitter Clingers Hang

BY Dr. Robert Owens in Politics, Politiocal Philosophy.
America is suffering through a leadership crisis that threatens to swamp the Ship of State in the shoals of collectivism, cronyism, and corruption.  Our leaders dither around acting as if they use Dilbert as a leadership manual destroying the present for a utopian future that will never come to pass.  They never seem to realize that their progressive collectivist diktats cause the symptoms they are implemented to cure.

Just as the massive collectivization of America under Hoover and FDR made the Depression great so BHO’s stimuli and strangulation regulation has once again proven that you cannot spend your way to prosperity and that taking $10 out of your right hand pocket siphoning off 50% for handling and depositing $5 in your left pocket doesn’t make you any richer.  In other words government doesn’t have anything to give anyone that it doesn’t take from someone else.

We are surrounded by monuments of failed and farcical leadership.
Our Dear Leader who will not utter the term “Radical Islamic Terrorism” tells us with a straight face that more people die in bathtub accidents than in terrorist attacks.  This may be true however, using the analogy when asked about terrorism was obviously devised to make light of a threat that is real and at least worthy of being named and treated as the death dealing attack upon our nation that it is.
One presidential candidate is a pathological liar grasping for power to do what?  Generate even bigger donations from crony capitalists and foreign powers for the Clinton Global Crime Initiative and bigger speaking fees for Bubba.
Speaking of which, what is the difference between Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton?  This isn’t the set up for a joke it is a legitimate question concerning the comparison between a lecherous former president and a lecherous former TV star. Here’s the punchline.  Bill Cosby is being tried by a crusading progressive judge for crimes in the past and Bill Clinton is lionized by crusading progressives in the media as our beloved ex-president who was smart enough to take credit for the laws forced upon him by the Gingrich Congress.  Bill Cosby gets booked and Bill Clinton books another speaking tour.  That’s the difference.

We have another presidential candidate who is selling hope and change under the banner of making America great again.  Having bought a few pigs in a poke in my life I have an uncanny ability to smell a pig when it walks into my living room.  It reminds me of a time when I wanted to refinance a house.  I decided to try one of the big online lenders who dominate a large portion of the click-for-cash market.  I spend a few days filling out forms and speaking with a friendly customer service person.
 Then the papers arrived for me to sign and the interest rate was quite a bit higher than we had agreed on.  When I called the friendly customer service person they were still really friendly as they advised, “Oh, that’s just a typo.  Go ahead and sign the papers any way and we’ll change the interest rate later.”  Suddenly a strong pungent odor wafted into my living room and I declined the generous offer to hold the bag.  I will recall this story and smell the wind as I vote this November.
 
The largest 3rd party and the only one that is going to be on the ballot in all fifty states has a candidate who makes boring feel exciting, people stripping naked at their national convention, promotes open borders, free trade and doesn’t have a prayer.
The best the political elites have to offer is launching a cypher as an independent candidate that they hope will force the election into the House where their golden boy Paul Ryan could engineer a pyric victory of the status quo.
What’s a patriot who believes in limited government, individual freedom, and economic opportunity to do?
Back in April of 2008 before our dear Leader was immaculated he addressed the reaction of the great unwashed in fly-over country by saying, “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
What was meant as a slur has become a badge of pride to many who proclaim, “I am a bitter clinger.”  Rejecting the racist projection that anyone who does not embrace the globalist gelding of America we Bitter Clingers may cling to our guns (2nd Amendment) and our religion (1st Amendment). We don’t have any antipathy towards those who don’t look like us because to even say that we do is assuming that we all look alike and we don’t.  We’re Americans and as such we look like everyone because we and our ancestors came from everywhere. 
To say we’re anti-immigrant is to say you can judge our hearts.  We are actually pro-American and believe we should control our borders, decide who we want to join us as citizens, select the best and brightest and move forward.  And to say we are anti-trade is like saying we don’t shop at Wal-Mart.  We are anti-giveaway trade where we get cheap products at the cost of gutting our industrial base and out-sourcing our jobs.  We want equitable trade, fair trade not we open our borders to the world and we still have to pay tariffs and fees to sell in other countries’ trade.
Trump has uttered the politically-incorrect phrase we bitter clingers believe in America First.  At least he has said it and perhaps now we can come in out of the shadows where the PC police have tried to marginalize us.  The Silent Majority is silent no more.  We want America First.  We want leaders who will restore the Constitution.  We want our country back!
So what do we do?
It is time for the bitter clingers to hang on because we are in for a bumpy ride.  In the next few years we will either step on the yellow brick road that leads to a return to the greatness Americans once took for granted or we will continue our slide down the shoot into the shabby collectivist hellhole the progressives call utopia.
Keep the Faith.  Keep the peace.  We shall overcome.
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens [email protected]  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens

Avast There’s an Iceberg Ahead!

By Dr. Robert Owens
 
One of America’s greatest philosophers once quipped, "A nickel isn't worth a dime today" and the inverse logic of that still holds true. On Sept. 22, 2011 in a speech to business executives Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, “Debt is the biggest threat to U.S. national security.”  When the leader of the people famous for  $800 hammers and  $640 toilet seats has to lecture business leaders about the perils of deficit spending we know capitalism in America has jumped the track.
After World War I the world’s monetary system was in disarray.  The victorious Allies sought to revive the gold standard.  However the structure which had been put in place after 1918 collapsed during the Great Depression. Some economists believe that the world’s attempt to remain on the gold standard prevented central banks from expanding the money supply enough to revive the world’s economies.  The problem was they couldn’t print enough money if it actually had to be worth something.

After World War II, representatives of the once again victorious allies met at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to create a new international monetary system. At the time the United States accounted for more than 50% of the world's manufacturing capacity and also held most of the world's gold.  Since America was the uncontested economic Superpower these leaders decided to tie world currencies to the dollar.  The value of the dollar would in turn be controlled and supported by the fact that the dollar would be tied to gold at $35 per ounce.
While the  Bretton Woods System was in force the central banks were given the task of maintaining fixed exchange rates. This was accomplished by massive and continuous intervention in foreign exchange markets. When a country's currency became too expensive in relation to the dollar, that country’s central bank would sell its currency for dollars thus driving down the value of its currency.  And if the value of a country's money became too low, that country would then aggressively buy its own currency to drive the price up.
This Bretton Woods System worked well until 1971.  By then, due to the “Guns and Butter” economic policies of the Johnson and Nixon administrations  inflation in the United States and America’s rapidly expanding trade deficit undermined the value of the dollar. As a result America urged the now recovered and economically powerful Germany and  Japan to increase the value of their currencies. Both nations did not want to do this. Raising the value of their currencies hurt their exports by increasing the prices for their goods in the United States which was their largest market. 
When the pressure became unbearable, when too many nations were redeeming too many dollars against America’s dwindling gold supply the United States unilaterally abandoned the fixed gold value of the dollar allowing it to "float."  Floating with relationship to money means it is allowed to fluctuate when compared to the currencies of other countries. Immediately the value of the dollar fell substantially when compared to other currencies, especially those of Germany and Japan.  

This caused turbulence in the economies of nations and sent shockwaves through the political systems of the world.   In consequence the leaders of the major countries made an effort to revive the Bretton Woods system.  They came together in 1971, and reached the Smithsonian Agreement which for the first time allowed for the negotiation of fixed exchange rates.  However, this attempt soon failed. 
In 1973, The United States and the other major economic powers agreed to a new system known as Managed Float.  This meant that central banks would still intervene with the buying and selling of their own currencies to eliminate any changes that might be perceived as too dramatic.  
How long will this system of floating money, fiat currency, and systemic debt last?
Since I started with a quote from my favorite American philosopher, Yogi Berra I will frame my comments about the end result of America’s love affair with monopoly money and ever growing debt with  another nugget from this source of double think profundity, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future"
You know, I know and anyone who has enough economic awareness to realize you can’t spend more than you make forever knows that our present governmental financial framework is unsustainable.  Why?  Apparently our leaders believe you can spend more than you make forever. 
If you have ever tried to manage your Visa payments by charging them to MasterCard you know the end of that game.  Our leaders have pawned our grandchildren’s future for the votes they buy with social programs, tax giveaways, and bail-outs.  However it is hard to lay all the blame on the shoulders of the perpetually re-elected.  The government is the people writ large.  Almost every household in America is in debt.  Almost every business in America is in debt.  
Debt is not a bad thing in and of itself.  Actually it is one of the most liberating inventions in the world.  It allows economic activity to grow based upon future activity instead of just on current holdings.  This provides a multiplier effect that has given rise to the modern world.
However, when we spend more of the future than the present can service we have inverted the pyramid and are inviting a correction.  Even if the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media are blathering on about how good the stock market is doing, that the pretend unemployment rate is falling, that there is no inflation, and that the President says everything is coming up roses, the alternative media knows the present course is unsustainable.  Unsustainable. That word is spoken day after day on Fox and printed multiple times every day online from thousands of blogs, magazines, and newspapers.  All it means is it can’t last forever, or as an alarmist might say, “A crash is coming!”  Or as the economic pirates who sail the crony capitalist seas might say, “Avast there’s an iceberg ahead!”
Sure the stock market is flying high.  With the Fed pumping 85 billion a month into the banking system why wouldn’t it?  With that kind of money coming in why not play the Lotto?  Sure the unemployment rate is falling as long as you don’t count the people who have quit looking for a job.  Sure there’s no inflation as long as you don’t count energy or food.  And of course the President says everything is getting better all the time that is what his teleprompter tells him to say.
So, how long will this system of floating money, fiat currency, and systemic debt last?  None of us gets to live in the world we grew up in because the world moves too fast.  Things change. What was science fiction yesterday is your cell phone today.  One thing we can know for sure is that  it isn’t over till it’s over.  Yet from a realistic evaluation of the deep hole we have spent ourselves into the future isn’t what it used to be and if the world were perfect it wouldn’t be.
Is there any way to stop this  train wreck before we hit the wall?  Can we reign in Washington and stop the money borrowed from the future that the best and the brightest are spending?  What do you think?  I wish I had an answer to that because I’m tired of answering the question.
What do we know?
We know that the record breaking new people elected to the House in the great Tea Party victories of 2010 and 2014 affirmed Boehner as the leader of the co-opted opposition, voted for multiple debt ceiling increases, and renewed the Patriot Act.  Now Mr. Ryan is carrying on the failed tradition bailing out Puerto Rico and reaching across the aisle to pass a 1.1 trillion dollar  porkulus budget that funds BHO’s fundamental transformation of America.  We know that another Progressive Republican à la Romney had no chance to beat BHO and we know it probably wouldn’t have made any difference if he did. 
Now along comes The Donald facing off against a restoration of the Billary interlewd.  Is there any chance of turning this Titanic around or at least altering course before we hit the iceberg of insolvency and impotence? 
At least with Billary we know where we will be headed, into the dustbin of History.  With Mr. Trump we are headed into uncharted waters.  Who knows what he will do?  I suspect even he doesn’t.  And as America’s greatest philosopher once  said, “If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.”
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Robert R. Owens [email protected]  Follow  Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens

Trump Tames Billary

By Dr. Robert Owens
Back in the days of the peace dividend, “Read my lips,” and “It’s the economy stupid” we were told we got two for the price of one.  And we sure did. One president to chase skirts in the Oval Office and one harridan to persecute his victims: Billary, the corrupt couple from Whitewater. Remember back in the Sleazy Nineties when the Clinton interlewed between George I and George II lowered the standards for what was acceptable public conduct.  Remember all the fun we had with these two madcap political savants: Chinagate, Travelgate, Whitewater, Vince Foster, Filegate, the Cattle Futures Miracle, Lootergate, Drug Dealer Donor Scandal, Ponzi Scheme, and the Political Favor Scandal. 
Then in 2000 Al Gore their trusty assistant failed in his bid to continue their legacy of lunacy.  After two terms of Bushness the female side of  Billary was in the Senate not passing legislation just screeching enough to keep her name in the headlines, approving wars she would later repudiate, and condemning Bush for believing phony intelligence she believed before she doubted.  In the meantime Bubba was flying off on the Lotlia Express to Orgy Island for a little RR with underage sex slaves.
Along comes 2008 and she and her con-conspirator Bill lined up for a re-run of the bimbo eruption express.  A funny thing happened on the way to her coronation.  Barack Hussein Obama erupted from who knows where, and reminiscent of the sainted JFK who defeated Tricky Dick he vanquished the Duality of Deception and just as JFK’s media facilitators built Camelot he built Chicago-on-the-Potomac.  This is a wondrous place where America gets fundamentally transformed from the Unipolar Hegemon of the World into a banana republic whose Tin Pot rules by decree, the borders are erased, the New Normal says .05% growth is the best we can do, and our Dear Leader bows to foreign despots and apologizes for who we were.  
All that was just a bump in the road.
Along comes 2012 and after four years as a figurehead Secretary of State handing out re-set buttons that didn’t work, presiding over the massacre in Benghazi, and setting up an illegal private server so Bubba could solicit pre-election bribes she is ready to ride the backs of a complicit media back into the White House.  A funny thing happened on her way to her second coronation.  Crazy Bernie after years of being a Socialist back bencher became a Democratic Socialist and started winning primaries.  His brand of “From each according to their ability to each according to their need” Marxism appealed to the everyone-gets-a-trophy-for-showing-up generation and Billery started taking on water.
As the BOGO candidate failed to put away the crazy guy on the left they traded promises to give everyone everything, to punish business, and humble, humiliate, and cripple America even more than BHO.  Just because she is universally known to be an inveterate liar people seemed to believe the crazy one more than the sleazy one.  
Crazy Bernie’s crowds filled stadiums and she was lucky to fill gymnasiums.  In an honest contest crazy would have beaten sleazy but it wasn’t anywhere near a fair fight.  The media carries water for the Duality of Debauchery and the super delegates in the Democrat system make the voters merely cover for smoke-filled rooms.
 
In the old days Bill would bite his lip and tell us, “I did not have sex with that woman,” or Hillary would remind us she is a woman and that would settle the matter.  Just like prosecutors believe they can indict a ham sandwich the media believed they could foist any type of incompetent dishonest lecher and his less than better half on the great unwashed. Then along came Trump.
The Donald upended the calculations of the Perpetually Reelected- Mainstream Media-Crony Capitalist Cartel.  The political hacks are confounded not knowing how to counter his counter punches.  The Media can’t help themselves. They have to cover everything he says since he pushes their ratings which have been taking a beating from alternative online sources.  They may spend more time trying to destroy him than anything else, but it turns out there is no such thing as bad press and they do spell his name right.  And the Crony Capitalists?  He’s one of their own, so if they haven’t already jumped on the Trump Train they will, because they know which side of their bread is buttered and they always end up on the winning side.

There are still many interesting things to look forward to in this unusual election cycle.
Billary will go over the top even if she loses California, but Crazy Bernie won’t go away.  He’s like the goofy old uncle who always shows up.  Sometimes you aren’t even sure how he is related to you, but he always shows up.  
Then we have the 2016 Republican National Convention which will be held in Cleveland, Ohio at the Quicken Loans Arena July 18-21, 2016.  It will be the GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH complete with all-star entertainment, suspense and drama.  This will break records for ratings and launch Trump the Magnificent onto the world stage as the anointed leader of the millionaires and billionaires who are going to save the forgotten man. 
Next comes the 2016 Democratic Convention that will be held at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia July 25th-28th, 2016.  That will either be a snoozefest or Chicago 1968 on steroids.  After this gathering of give-away artists have done all they can to whip their disparate interest groups into line, bribe the covetous, and fool the rest, after more than a year of preliminaries we finally will arrive at the actual election campaign.
Ah, the 2016 election this should be a show worth watching.  Billary will try everything.  Bill will bite his lip and Hillary will remind everyone she’s a woman.  The Media will do their best to paint her as a St. Hillary of Arch riding in to save us from the Trump monster.
This should be Kabuki of the highest order.  Billary will flail around using the same Democrat playbook as always and hurl baseless charges through their media megaphone like they did with Romney, “He hasn’t paid taxes in years” or “He gave someone a wedgie back in seventh grade.”  Bill will bite his lip and Hillary will still be a woman.  
Mr. Trump will counterpunch so effectively Bill will be calling her Crooked Hillary before he’s done.  They won’t know what hit them.  They are busy building up the Clinton Library and Message Parlor with bribes, I mean donations, from the misogynistic oil slicks and anyone else who wants to get on the waiting list to rent the Lincoln Bedroom or get a pardon.  Having made millions giving 20 minute speeches about nothing Billary has no conception of what a person who really builds things and is a mover and shaker based on their achievements not their connections can move and shake.  They’ll have PTSD by the time the election results add their name to Goldwater and McGovern in the list of also rans.
 Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @  http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens  [email protected]  Follow  Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens
 
Excerpt:
There are still many interesting things to look forward to in this unusual election cycle.

By Dr. Robert Owens
It is not often that we get to witness a true phenomenon.   
The Reagan Revolution was exciting but it was not a phenomenon.  It was a carefully planned, long fought, and hard won battle between the Conservative wing and the Progressive wing of the Republican Party.   
The Reagan Revolution began with The Speech by Ronaldos Maximus in support of Barry Goldwater delivered on a television program, Rendezvous with Destiny.  It blossomed during his two successful terms as Governor of California, and sputtered a little in 1976 when he lost the nomination for President to Gerald Ford in the last contested convention in American History.  Then after four years of hard grass roots work Reagan’s followers, this author included in their ranks, captured the party from precinct captain to national chairman.  The next eight years led to many successes, compromises, and a failure culminating in the party being handed over as a prize to George the First and the rest is History.  The Bush dynasty ran the brand into the ground. 
Enter The Donald.  Now here is a phenomenon.  The last time a non-politician came from nowhere to capture the nomination of one of the major parties was in 1940 when the so-called Miracle in Philadelphia brought about the surprise nomination of a life-long Democrat who mirrored FDR’s positions on most important issues. He came in as a dark horse and through clever manipulation and behind the scenes machinations whisked the nomination out of the hands of the three top contenders: Senator Robert Taft of Ohio (the son of President William H. Taft), Senator Arthur Vandenberg of Michigan, and Manhattan District Attorney Thomas Dewey.  Of course this was back in the day when there really were smoke filled backrooms and party bosses and long before primaries and State caucuses. 
Here we are a life-time later and the ideological descendants of the Wilkie wonks after turning the Party of Reagan into Democrat Lite were planning on foisting another Bush on their unwilling base.  Trump trumped them all.  He knocked off one establishment straw man after another as well as the closest thing we will see to Reagan to stand unchallenged for the nomination.  No grass roots organization, no army of K-Street consultants, hardly any advertising, just Trump.  His triumph over everyone else who should have won is a true political phenomenon. 
Now comes the general election at least once the Democrats stop the charade of Hillary losing her way to the nomination and hold their coronation of the Queen of Hearts.   
Even relying on the yellow-dog Democrats, the dead Democrats who continue to vote, and the undocumented Democrats Hillary is going to face an uphill battle.  When you consider she may be ethically challenged, personally cold, under threat of indictment, and bringing Slick Willy along  her campaign strategy consists of convincing people that her opponent is worse. You can see she may not be the certainty the liberal media make her out to be.  
Just look at her record.  Everything she has accomplished has been because she said “I do” to Bubba.  While he was playing hound dog and doing some government jobs on the side she was busy covering up his serial abuse of women and smoothing out the wrinkles from his frequent bimbo eruptions.  Then after they left the White House, looting it on the way out the door, she ran for the Senate in a state where the Democrats own the vote.  She spends a term and a half accomplishing nothing and is appointed as Secretary of State.  The judgement of her tenure as America’s leading diplomat has yet to be adjudicated.  She is a poor campaigner at best.  And she’s bringing Bill back to the scene of his crimes.  This is not the recipe for the Clinton Crime Family to recapture the capitol.   
If that isn’t enough we do have Hillary’s top scandals as reported in World Net Daily(this is an abbreviated version): 

By Dr. Robert Owens
That ultimate symbol of mischievous scamp Bart Simpson in Season One of the longest running show in TV history when caught red-handed offered up one of his signature phrases, “I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, there's no way you can prove anything.” 
This came to mind when I was thinking about Hillary “They’ll Never Indict Me” Clinton and her morally challenged obviously corrupt character.   Donald Trump has said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”  Hillary could say, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t get indicted.”   
Everyone in the country knows that if any of us common people did one hundredth of what she has done in the email scandal alone we would have already been indicted along with the ten year Navy Vet indicted for taking a selfie on a submarine.  The Obama Justice Department is not going to indict Mrs. Clinton no matter what the FBI recommends.  She is above the law and she knows it or as she infamously said in the Benghazi hearing with regard to our four dead heroes, “What does it matter now?” 
As a person who has been involved with and has closely followed the American political scene for more than fifty years this is the first time in my personal memory or Historical knowledge that a potential candidate for one party has promised to prosecute a potential candidate of the other party if elected. 
As Secretary of State, Hillary’s accomplishments include the failed reset with Russia and of course her debacle in Libya.  As a United State Senator what did she accomplish?  In eight years she only sponsored three inconsequential laws:   
S.3145, which designated a portion of U.S. Route 20A, located in Orchard Park, N.Y., as the “Timothy J. Russert Highway,” after the former “Meet the Press” host. 
S. 3613, which renamed the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2951 New York Highway 43 in Averill Park, New York, as the “Major George Quamo Post Office Building.” 
S. 1241 which made the brick house of 19th century female union leader Kate Mullany a national historic site. 
Her major accomplishment is that she married a man who became the most ethically challenged president in American History.  As the wife of Bill Clnton she was deeply involved in smothering the serial bimbo eruptions which grew out of his long history of having affairs, sexually harassing women who worked for him, and assaulting others.   This is the person who portrays herself as an advocate of women’s rights.   
To highlight just one of her hypocritical faux stances for women’s rights look at her advocacy for equal pay.  The Clinton Foundation pays women executives 38% less than their male counterparts.  During her time in the Senate she paid women 72 cents for every dollar she paid men.  According to public records her current campaign pays women staffers less than she pays men. So much for putting your money where your mouth is! 
Looking back once more to the email scandal that Hillary so nonchalantly dismisses if as she maintains she never received nor sent any classified material during her entire term as our Secretary of State my question is, what was she doing besides traveling the world at our expense?  Was she out of the loop and merely Secretary of State in name only?   It is inconceivable that anyone could be the Secretary of State and not send or receive any classified material.  That is beyond belief and a lie so transparent it shows total contempt for those it is meant to fool.
In the current election the Great Impresario likes to label people.  In many ways it is an effective form of political shorthand.  It sums up the thoughts, accusations, and beliefs about a person and brings them crashing in whenever they hear the catcall.  Lyin Ted and Little Marco have taken their toll picked up and repeated by the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media and their pet FOX.  Now we have Crooked Hillary.  The others were just effective.  This one seems appropriate. 
If Hillary wins the presidency it will be a watershed just as the election and then re-election of her husband was.  As his marked the end of public morality hers will mean the end of the rule of law.  It will become evident to anyone observant enough to note the sunrise that enforcement of the bewildering lattice of laws and regulations are only aimed at the common folk not at our masters. 
If such a legally challenged individual can fool enough of the people all the time to sit in the oval office it reminds me of what Bart said to Homer after it was revealed he had cheated on an important test, “I cheated on the intelligence test. I'm sorry. But I just want to say that the past few weeks have been great. Me and you have done stuff together. You've helped me out with things and we're closer than we've ever been. I love you, Dad. And I think if something can bring us that close it can't possibly be bad.” 
Doing bad things for good purposes is the operational rational of Progressive Liberalism.  The ends justify the means was the operational rational of all the megalomaniac dictators of world History.  Please explain the difference. 
 Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens [email protected]  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens
Excerpt: Doing bad things for good purposes is the operational rational of Progressive Liberalism. 
Tags:
Hillary Clinton, Dr. Robert Owens, Email scandal, Benghazi scandal, Corrupt Hillary