~ Featuring ~
Chinese Moon Landing Warrants Action
by Harold Hutchison  
If Democrats Honestly Cared About Border Security,
They Would Not Support Sanctuary Cities
{} ~ In their every press conference and interview rejecting President Trump’s call for a wall along our southern border to help prevent and protect against human trafficking of women and children... the unbridled import of opioids, and the entry of criminals and terrorists into our country, the Democrats maintain that they oppose only the Wall but otherwise strongly support border security. Thus, they state that they prefer drones and hi-tech equipment instead of a wall because, they say, those more modern approaches will do an even better job than will an old-fashioned wall at guarding the border. In other words, they claim to be as concerned as is the President over the chaos transpiring along our porous southern border. There are two ways to demonstrate they are lying. One way is by sitting and arguing back-and-forth with the other side endlessly, as in a cable news panel discussion. I have come to hate wasting my time watching those. When I have a few moments each day to grab some news on Fox, the only value-added from Marie Harf, Chris Hahn, and Jessica Tarlov is that, while muting them, they offer a few moments for me to check the channel guide or pay a bill or two. But there is a much quicker alternative way to cut through the muck and prove Pulosi, scumbag/clown-Schumer, and their gang a bunch of liars on border security: Just ask yourself: Side by side with their opposition to a wall, why do they also support Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States? If they truly are so concerned about protecting the public against the infiltration of Illegals into our midst, why do they seek to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from receiving the information and tools ICE needs to remove illegal entrants safely and promptly from our land? Would that kind of helpful cooperation with ICE not be a logical part of any drone, hi-tech, and “everything-but-a-wall” approach to protecting the border? They support Sanctuary Cities because they want porous borders, and they will do everything humanly possible to swell the tide of illegal immigration into a tsunami. They do not want word to spread southward that this country punishes and promptly deports those here illegally. Au contraire — they want a message to be sent to Guatemala, the Honduras, El Salvador, and Mexico that it all is a children’s game of tag: once you get past the “home-base” line without getting tagged, you may call “Sanctuary” — just like Quasimodo or even Totalmodo — and you are safe. Thus, ICE plans a raid to arrest Illegals, and Pulosi’s northern California ally, the despicable mayor of Oakland, publicly warns the Illegals that “The Fuzz” are coming, so get away quick. In another time in this country’s history, that mayor of Oakland would have been arrested. However, in today’s America it is the President of the United States whom the Democrats would impeach. The inmates in charge of the asylum... 

Lawless Borders Are A Humanitarian 
Crisis It’s Past Time To Finally Solve  
by Chip Roy  
{} ~ Texas has a proud history of Americans and Mexicans traveling across the border to the benefit of each nation. The result is an extraordinarily unique and prosperous relationship... and we must ensure that goods, services, and people continue to flow across our border to the advancement of all. Our economies are stronger, our people are stronger, and our nations are stronger when the border works as it should. Any informed Texan will tell you that our border, in far too many places, is dangerous and broken. The effects of cartels, gangs, terrorists, human traffickers, and all manner of criminals are reaching ever farther into our states and communities. Human beings are used as currency for evil criminal organizations to gain power and wealth. American citizens are dying. Immigrants who seek to come here are dying. The president is correct to demand that these atrocities end immediately. Excuses from either party must end. No more race-based pandering from the left and no more shilling to the financial interests of big corporations on the right. No more nonsense about fences “not working” or excuses about the inability to construct a fence due to parks and the large amounts of private land along the Rio Grande. Failing to provide necessary resources to establish operational control of our border is a dereliction of our constitutional duty. That means we build fences and navigable roads. That means more border patrol agents and more judges. That means more technology. That means cane-clearing along the Rio Grande. It is common sense, and here is why...
Congressional Democrats Sing the Same Old Song
by Elad Hakim
{} ~ Apart from the issue of border security, congressional Democrats continue to obsess over the possibility of impeaching the president and the extent of the president's pardoning power... Most notably, Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) recently promised to impeach President Trump in a profanity-laced tirade, while  Representative scumbag-Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) moved to prohibit Trump and any future president from issuing pardons to "themselves, their families, their administration or campaign staff."  Given what we currently know, both issues are moot and reflect mere partisan rants. The Constitution (Article 2, Section 4) specifies two specific crimes – treason and bribery – that merit impeachment and removal from office. As set forth in Vox, the Constitution references a broader category of "other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" that could also justify impeachment. To initiate articles of impeachment, a simple majority would be needed in the House. A trial would then be held in the Senate with the chief justice of the Supreme Court presiding. Given that Republicans gained additional seats in the Senate, conviction is highly unlikely. Practically speaking, to impeach a president, there must be an impeachable offense. To date, there has been no evidence of any offense by President Trump. There has been a great deal of debate regarding the legality of the hush money payments and campaign finance laws and Trump's alleged real estate deals in Russia. However, to date, there has been no credible evidence implicating the president. Finally, Tlaib's recent and tasteless allegation against Trump is not an impeachable offense even if some Democrats find it true...
Scientists Admit “Math Error” Led To Alarming
Results In Major Global Warming Study
by Michael Bastasch
{} ~ The scientists behind a headline-grabbing global warming study did something that seems all too rare these days... they admitted to making mistakes and thanked the researcher, a global warming skeptic, who pointed them out. “When we were confronted with his insight it became immediately clear there was an issue there,” study co-author Ralph Keeling told The San Diego Union-Tribune on Tuesday. Their study, published in October, used a new method of measuring ocean heat uptake and found the oceans had absorbed 60 more heat than previously thought. Many news outlets relayed the findings, but independent scientist Nic Lewis quickly found problems with the study. Keeling, a scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, owned up to the mistake and thanked Lewis for finding it. Keeling and his co-authors submitted a correction to the journal Nature...
commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 
Faces Poverty’s Demise Worldwide!
{} ~ As every public-spirited citizen of these United States knows by now, 29-year old commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the youngest woman ever elected to Congress... She, of a sudden, represents New York’s 14th District, having beaten what the mainstream media calls an old white male by the name of Joe Crowley, though why the color of his skin should matter is a mystery. Miss commie-Ocasio-Cortez also has perfectly lovely white skin, much like Mr. Crowley and even Senator Elizabeth dinky-Warren, despite her ever-changing genealogy. Yet only Crowley receives the media’s “white skin” charge. Actually I am not certain Miss commie-Ocasio-Cortez is really 29 years old. I have reviewed her public utterances since she entered public life some 12 months ago and she sounds more like a 14-year-old. Yet somewhere along the way she acquired a taste for economics, which in her flighty mind she confuses with expropriation of the wealth of those she considers “rich.” Bearing in mind that her last job in the private sector was as a bartender, her conception of “rich” might extend to the guy at the end of the bar who drinks champagne. He will not be drinking champagne for long if commie-Alexandria has her way. She is a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist, in other words a reactionary. She and people like her have been missing how the world has changed, lo these past decades. Yet many of us dissent from her sunny views. By that I do not mean only us limousine libertarians in the West. I mean the many millions of those worldwide who were living under the poverty level in 1980 — nine years before commie-Alexandria was born, assuming she is right about her age. Back then half the world lived in poverty, according to scholars at the Brookings Institution and the World Data Lab. Unbeknownst to Miss commie-Ocasio-Cortez and the left-wing of the Democratic Party, poverty around the world has been declining since 1980 until today to the extent that half of the world — 3.8 billion people — is middle class or — dare I say it — “rich.” Those are the findings of Homi Kharas of Brookings and Kristofer Hamel of the World Data Lab. She would bring us back to the levels of taxation practiced forty years ago. Now she and other reactionary socialists, for instance commie-Bernie Sanders, long for those days of higher taxes, lower growth, less stress on the world’s resources, more government control. In other words, life as it is lived in Cuba, but without the obtrusive dictatorship we are told...
Chinese Moon Landing Warrants Action
by Harold Hutchison:  Just after the 50th anniversary of Apollo 8, China’s successful landing of the Chang'e 4 probe on the far side of the moon made headlines, and deservedly so. This was an event to be noted. It was a remarkable technological achievement — and a big-time warning that America’s strategic advantages in space are not as big as they used to be.

             Does American superiority in space matter? Think of it this way: The capabilities that enable us to put a Joint Direct Attack Munition within 30 feet of some ISIS thugs, know the positions of friendly troops, or keep an eye on the activities of Russia near the border with Ukraine come from satellites in orbit. In essence, America has dominated the “high ground” of space for close to 60 years.
               Or, to put it bluntly, before there was ever a hint of a Space Force, we had already militarized space. There may be many who will claim we shouldn’t militarize space, but when space is where communications, reconnaissance, and navigation systems are, then it’s already become a military theater. That’s the reality of the situation. And as was the case with air power, eventually space assets will start shooting at each other.
               After Operation Desert Storm, America’s dominance in space was noted by Russia and China. They began working to catch up. They got a lot of help in that regard thanks to the penny-wise and pound-foolish “peace dividend” that came after the fall of the Soviet Union. America, to a large extent, rested on the laurels of winning the Cold War.
               More importantly, China is developing hypersonic weapons and is also trying to make a play for space. In 2007, China destroyed a failed weather satellite — a sign that they had the capability to contest American access to space. How did the Chinese catch up? Well, it turns out that America was busy dealing with radical Islamic terrorism and has been since 2001. It still is today, as indicated by the recent airstrike that took out one of the jihadis behind the 2000 attack on USS Cole (another was killed in a 2002 drone strike, and a third was captured and interrogated).
               When 9/11 happened, there was the need to prepare for the military campaign, not just against al-Qaida and its affiliates, but also the state sponsors of terrorism like the Taliban and Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. This drew a lot of attention for the next decade, and as such, other priorities slipped — and that was with George W. Bush in office. The military — and America’s edge in space — took more hits from his successor.
               Even before Osama bin Laden was terminated, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama was already starting to hit the defense budget with a number of cuts, including what turned out to be a premature halt of F-22 production, and the early retirement of USS Enterprise (CVN 65). He also chopped the planned space shuttle replacement.
               President Donald Trump, though, has begun to take space seriously. He not only has been pushing for the creation of a Space Force, he is also taking other steps to restore American primacy in space. A primacy that could very well make the difference between winning and losing a war.
               Among the plans are the assembly of a permanent presence around the moon, as a way station for journeys to Mars. A return of manned missions to the moon, and journeys elsewhere in the solar system are also on the agenda. These not only will give us a chance to learn more about the other planets, but the technological improvements will have benefits that take surprising turns. Such technological leaps can also have military applications, adding to America’s qualitative edge over China.
               It is obvious we will need it, because China has taken advantage of the end of the Cold War to make its own qualitative improvements. Twenty years ago, the bulk of the People’s Liberation Army Navy was in a large number of Luda-class destroyers, Jianghu-class frigates, and Romeo-class diesel-electric submarines, vessels that were relatively low-technology, albeit numerous. Today, though, that navy has the Type 55 and Type 52 destroyers and the Jiangkai-class frigates. As for submarines, the bulk of China’s force are modern Kilo-class submarines — backed by a small force of advanced nuclear attack submarines.
               With China’s rise, and the return of an aggressive Russia, America may wind up feeling thankful for the Trump administration’s push to make America’s advantage in space large again. It won’t just benefit our military, but it could also make life on earth much easier.  

~The Patriot Post  

Views: 9


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Chip BokPolitical Cartoons by Steve Kelley


The Fall Of Fake News!! Quiet Shake-Up At MSNBC After Station Hemorrhages Viewers Following Mueller Debacle 

Reports are surfacing about a quiet shake-up of personnel at MSNBC after the cable news station lost more than 30% of their audience after the Mueller debacle.

Apparently MNSBC doesn’t think their financial woes are newsworthy given that they didn’t run any breathless stories about their own failings.

News of MSNBC’s collapse can’t come as a surprise to insiders who undoubtedly are fully aware that their audience no longer trusts them.

One source familiar told Mediaite the changes came amidst mounting complaints from NBC News chief Andy Lack about a dip in MSNBC’s ratings following the end of the Mueller investigation. In May, ratings for the network in the advertiser coveted 25-54 demo were down 32% year over year.

MSNBC viewers were asked: How much do you agree that MSNBC regularly reports made up or fake news about Donald Trump and his administration?

The responses were devastating! While 35% or respondents agree that MSNBC pushes Fake News, only 24% disagreed. That’s a ratings death sentence!

What do you expect from a channel that boasts disgraced liar, Brian Williams, and race pimp, Al Sharpton?

Bright Start News@BRIGHTstrt

MAJOR SHAKEUP AT MSNBC - Ratings crater after Mueller Report Debacle! 

MSNBC Shakeup: Jonathan Wald and Dan Arnall Take Dayside

MSNBC quietly implemented a sweeping shakeup in programming this week, Mediaite has learned, appointing SVP of programming and development Jonathan Wald and MSNBC executive editor Dan Arnall to lead...

Flashback: MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow’s Ratings Plummet To Yearly Low

MSNBC primetime host Rachel Maddow brought in her worst weekly ratings of the year last week.

Her show last week averaged 2,324,000 viewers, with an average audience of 337,000 in the 25-54 age demographic, both of which mark yearly lows for the liberal television host, according to Nielsen Media Research.

Maddow first saw a dramatic drop in ratings following the conclusion of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. Her previous low for a week in 2019 was the last week in March, the first full week after Mueller submitted his conclusion to Attorney General William Barr, where she averaged 2,458,000 viewers with 392,000 in the demo.

She spent two years dissecting every aspect of the special counsel’s investigation into whether President Donald Trump conspired with the Russians to win the 2016 presidential election. The night Mueller submitted his findings to Barr, Maddow appeared to hold back tears over the fact that neither the president nor any family members were indicted.

Compared to Maddow’s low ratings last week, Fox News’ Sean Hannity, whose program is often the most-watched among all cable news shows, averaged 3,108,000 viewers with just under half-a-million viewers in the key demographic.

She also nearly tripled CNN’s Chris Cuomo’s weekly ratings. His program only had 880,000 viewers with 225,000 in the key demo.


© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service