Wednesday Noon ~ thefrontpagecover

~ Featuring ~    
Beware Universal Healthcare Requirementst1Cce9SSkhCpSC9QBSWSiN25BVW0aeYhxgeBk0n0T-6vFlGH3740S-df6MIZv8Kc8WbqWuSgb5XLStXBORbGkRyKP9csYlHCzt_S2ITAwLDeMdi8ZjSUa0LIHeCaeKMiPws007Is4eToU4cxnGALFeSiErF36BV5-jRoG8Q=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
Arnold Ahlert  
Senator Rand Paul and Senator Lindsey
Graham Discuss John Bolton Removal
Uwz9eI98ED8pF88BwN_SFammkPPkcLE2r89IAGE3Qxval6P2NSB6Le71GIpMxm3KAVc9rp5MaKegUunZT_SFz2RvR5oDVNoSZW71t-jnH8Z-fDc8TK9DQEaoTEulznWskXiPt94Fe0w0qBR2=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby sundance
{ } ~ U.S. Senator Rand Paul supports the removal of John Bolton as National Security Advisor due to an abject difference of foreign policy with Bolton... Also, Senator Lindsey Graham cautiously supports the removal of John Bolton from a concessionary position that Trump is correct, and the endless foreign intervention needs to have some conclusion. Beyond the orange-man-bad democrats, and their new found political love for Bolton their former nemesis, interestingly the strongest DC and media voices against Bolton’s removal are foreign policy voices primarily concerned about supporting Israel Ted Cruz, Mark Levin etc. So far today CTH notes no-one is mentioning Bolton’s failed policy on Venezuela. That policy/effort was all John Bolton; ….and that brings another point into the picture. Typical war-hawks like John Bolton, and those within the ‘industrial military‘ circle, do not value the more forceful use of economic strategy to accomplish national security objectives. The economic approach is easily President Trump’s preferred weapon; and right now the biggest geopolitical confrontation is the U.S. -v- China. Hong Kong is a part of the geopolitical dynamic; but it is a part President Trump is able to carve out from the larger issue.  No doubt the Bolton approach would have been to send troops in/around Hong Kong, eventually drawing a conflict with Beijing. A person like Bolton would be exactly the wrong person in the game of economic chess. In my opinion Trump’s China trade strategy is much better off without Bolton mucking it up. With Bolton gone, might we see Tom Bossert re-enter the administration?
9/11: You Said You Wouldn’t Forget. You Did.
{ } ~ We came together after 9/11 as Americans. We formed a bond of unity the likes of which I could not remember save for when I was a child during World War II... Then, housewives rolled bandages at night for the Red Cross. Kids carried scrap paper and metal to school for the war effort. People proudly hung military insignias in their windows to recognize their family members who were at war. Mothers dressed their children in miniature military uniforms. In the coming decades, that unity was shredded. The Vietnam War divided the country as much as WWII united it. On campus, students cheered for the enemy: “Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, Ho Chi Minh is going to win.” The Vietnamese communist regime so widely endorsed by the American Left produced 800, 000 refugees who were willing to risk their lives by fleeing to treacherous open seas rather than submit to the brutalities of the regime. California Governor Jerry Brown militated against letting them settle anywhere in California. He even sent an aide to Travis Air Force Base to prevent plane loads of Vietnamese refugees from landing. This is the same Jerry Brown who decades later wanted to eliminate the southern border. Unlike Hispanics, Vietnamese did not identify with the Democratic Party.After 9/11, neighborhoods throughout America flew the flag. First responders, especially police and firefighters, were hailed as heroes. President George W. Bush, often demeaned by the mainstream media, seemed to be given a grace period as he provided symbolic unity to the idea of America. Eighteen years later, the same first responders, some dying of cancer from exposure on that fateful day, had to beg Congress to continue their health benefits. Patriotism, the embrace of the nation, is no longer praised. A hostile anti-American media has transformed patriotism into a slur to be tied to white nationalism in an identity politics that slices America into groups with competing interests. Many of them find transient unity in something called intersectionality, which pits everyone against the so-called white patriarchy. No one checked the identities of the first responders who ran toward the Twin Towers on 9/11; nor did they, in turn, ask the identities of the people whom they rescued. The New York Fire Department, like the New York Police Department, was, on 9/11/2001, largely white and male. No one said, “Check your white patriarchy at the door and don’t enter.” Today, some New Yorkers find it amusing to dunk the police with buckets of water or to climb atop a police car with impunity, knowing that any response by the police will be met with a microscopic examination for excessive force...  
A NRA Member Makes Some 
Humble Suggestions on Gun Control
{ } ~ Few things exist on which there is more BS spoken than gun control. It's highly unlikely, indeed almost impossible, that confiscating weapons like AR-15s or similar will do anything at all to combat killings, mass or otherwise, in the USA or anywhere else for that matter... People who are crazy enough to want to mass murder will, unfortunately, find a way. You only have to look to Paris, where personal gun ownership is virtually illegal for private citizens and multiple dozens of people were murdered by jihadis at the Bataclan Theater and across the city, or Chicago, another supposedly gun-free zone, relatively anyway, where five were murdered and at least 29 wounded over the last weekend alone, for corroboration. People who believe this kind of confiscation or control will solve everything, or even close, are living in a virtue-signaling/morally narcissistic dreamland. The "Mad Bomber" terrorized New York City in the 1940s and 1950s "with explosives that he planted in theaters, terminals, libraries, and offices." He wasn't caught for 16 years. There are plenty of ever-expanding ways to wreak havoc. NEVERTHELESS, a disturbing number of people are being shot—particularly school children—and we ought to try to do something about it. Yes, it's true that the statistics on mass killings are fudged and exaggerated, but as a member of the NRA I have a few, tentative, suggestions: Every school, depending on size, should have a number of armed people—more than they even think necessary—on the premises, at least for now. These should be a mixture of police, private security services, administrators, and teachers, a few, if not all, in plainclothes dress. None of the latter two should be coerced into this service, even remotely. They would do poorly. They should be volunteers who also commit to training and, equally important, constant retraining. The same should be true of every public facility, such as department stores, large restaurants, and theatres. A significant number of these people should also be plainclothes. A few, unfortunately not all, mass killers will be deterred by this. But it's worth it. Background checks should be mandatory for ALL gun sales or exchanges outside the immediate family. Yes, I am aware of the slippery slope argument do gun shows really have checks? but I think it's ultimately insufficient. There's a similar argument for just about anything one does in life. We should be grown-ups and recognize that people often sell guns because they are in financial need. If that gun is sold in private to a madman or wannabe jihadist, many people's lives are in danger. Is that what you really want? Do you want to be responsible for that? How would you feel if you sold a gun to someone you didn't really know and he or she turned up on TV having shot a half-dozen people? Not good, I would assume. If there's a law for background checks, it should hold for private sales as well. Otherwise, it's not really a law. We all want to think we have good judgment about people, but do we? I've made plenty of mistakes that way and I bet you have too. So-called "Red Flag Laws," trying to catch the perpetrators when they are young. Here we are on treacherous ground. Who determines who is crazy? Not easy, is it? The totalitarian potential is high. We need to do some thinking about this, but America clearly has a mental illness problem and solving this, more than anything, would bring down the number of mass killings. The problem is extremely complex, exacerbated by the liberal takeover of the psychological helping professions. Concealed carry. I'm all for it. It could save a lot of lives. But one caveat—the license to carry should always be contingent on required retesting ironically like an annual smog inspection. I know this from personal experience. When I go back to a firing range after a long hiatus, I have forgotten many things I have to relearn. That is why, as of now, I have not applied for a concealed carry permit, although it is relatively simple in my state. With all this, I am an adamant supporter of the Second Amendment and not, primarily, because of hunting or sporting reasons. My primary reason, in today's America, should be obvious...
{ } ~ Many, like us, are appalled that some politicians now openly advocate the failed system of socialism, while they and others try to deny the obvious fact that free enterprise has enriched the lives of billions of people... One is tempted to chalk such opinions up to an abysmal ignorance of history. But something else is going on, too. The meaning of “socialism” has evolved; or, one might say, it is flying under a false flag. When Democratic politicians advocate socialism, they don’t talk about North Korea, Soviet Russia, Albania, Cuba anymore or Venezuela anymore. Rather, they talk about Sweden, Denmark and Norway–countries that are not, in fact, socialist. One might conclude that they just want a slightly larger welfare state–accompanied, although they never say this, by a less progressive tax system and often more business-friendly policies. Americas Majority Foundation has done some interesting polling on how Americans view socialism, as well as free market capitalism. Their report is embedded below; I recommend reading it in its entirety. Here are a few highlights: We surveyed voters how they view the terms Socialism and Capitalism. On socialism, we asked “When you hear or read the term ‘socialism’, do you think of Scandinavian Social Democracies like Denmark and Sweden OR Venezuela, North Korea and the Former Soviet Union?” On Capitalism, we asked, “When you hear or read the phrase ‘free market capitalism’ do you think…It is an economic system that allows people to pursue their passions and create their own careers and businesses or do you think It is an economic system where those at the top benefit at the expense of the rest?” That, I think, is a good way of posing the questions. At the Top Line, 52% of all respondents associate “Socialism” with “Denmark/Sweden.” Simultaneously, 52% relate “Free Market Capitalism” to “pursue their passions.” So there are a considerable number of voters who, in this sense, approve of both socialism and capitalism...
The Real Warmongers in Washington
{ } ~ Propaganda of impending war, or “war scare,” is an effective method by which the Left creates mass hysteria and forces people into accepting its “peace-keeping” policies... This method was consistently used by the Communist Party in Soviet Union throughout its reign. The typical motif in the communist propaganda was that the Soviets were peace-loving and Americans were warmongers who would launch an attack at any time. Today, “war with Iran” dominates the headlines. At the center of this propaganda campaign are self-proclaimed “Iran experts” who depend on this theme to justify their legitimacy and existence. Far-left organizations such as the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) and its affiliates, who comprise this cadre of pundits, seem to have taken the lead role in this undercurrent of public deception. Trita Parsi, NIAC’s former president, has been obsessively beating the drums of war since the U.S. exited the Iran nuclear deal. Negar Mortazavi, a journalist who advocates for diplomacy with the regime, has been incessantly publishing op-ed articles with apocalyptic undertones. The current policy director of NIAC, Jamal Abdi, has embarked on a self-described campaign to “prevent a war with Iran.” All this rhetoric stems from these individuals’ disdain for President Trump. Denials from the Trump administration regarding any intention to initiate a war notwithstanding, sympathizers of the Iranian regime continue alarming the public about this devastating imaginary war. Interestingly, even the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ali Khamenei, has said there will be no war with the U.S. The propaganda that these people disseminate are verbatim talking points of the Iranian Foreign Minister, Javad Zarif, who is well-known among the Iranian people for his pathological dishonesty. While Zarif makes appearances on American news networks and warns that the U.S. is intent on starting a war with Iran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is busy hijacking and planting mines on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf and launching missiles into Saudi Arabia via Houthi proxies and near the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. While NIAC and its followers warn that Ambassador John Bolton hopes to finish the war he started in Iraq by attacking Iran, the commander of the IRGC, Hossein Salami, seeks the “opportunity” to fight the U.S. and draws parallels to the destruction of the Twin Towers. By dissemination of this propaganda, advocates of regime appeasement aim to force the Trump administration to resume scumbag/liar-nObama’s appeasement policy. In this case, the prospect of a war is the most convenient and compelling argument by which the Iranian regime’s talking heads toy with people’s emotions and deceive the public. The same ploy was used by NIAC and scumbagliar-nObama advisor Ben Rhodes to sell the Iran nuclear deal to the American people. The logic at that time was, “Agree to the deal or else the alternative is war.” Unfortunately, some Democratic politicians who antagonize President Trump at any cost have joined in on this campaign of deception. Rep. scumbag-Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), for example, stated that the U.S. is to blame for Iran’s aggression and Trump is leading the U.S. into a war. This is a major excursion from his 2015 stance, when he said, “we must pressure Iran and use force if they violate the nuclear deal.”...  
Beware Universal Healthcare Requirementst1Cce9SSkhCpSC9QBSWSiN25BVW0aeYhxgeBk0n0T-6vFlGH3740S-df6MIZv8Kc8WbqWuSgb5XLStXBORbGkRyKP9csYlHCzt_S2ITAwLDeMdi8ZjSUa0LIHeCaeKMiPws007Is4eToU4cxnGALFeSiErF36BV5-jRoG8Q=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xArnold Ahlert:  “Fat shaming doesn’t need to end; it needs to make a comeback. Some amount of shame is good. We shamed people out of smoking and into wearing seat belts. We shamed them out of littering and most of them out of racism. Shame is the first step in reform.” —Bill Maher

“When the British went to war exactly 80 years ago they swiftly lost the individual freedom to make fundamental choices over the way they lived. … And there was one other curtailment of individual choice that touched every home in the land: what people could eat.” —Daily Beast columnist Clive Irving

“The balance that we have to strike here, frankly, is about what government can and should do around creating incentives and then banning certain behaviors.” —Democrat presidential candidate lowlife-Kamala Harris, in response to a question about changing government dietary guidelines regarding consumption of red meat to address the impact of climate change

It is no secret that every Democrat candidate for president supports some version of government-run healthcare. It is also no secret that the vast majority of people on board with the idea view such healthcare in terms of having insurance that gives them better, and ostensibly cheaper, access to to doctors, hospitals and other healthcare providers.

What those same people don’t see? Ultimately, government run healthcare isn’t about healthcare. It’s about the further accumulation of power. Power to determine who gets what — or who gets nothing at all, unless certain “conditions” are met.

“Patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of over 40 will not be referred for routine surgery unless they are able to reduce it to under that number over a nine-month period. … Patients with a BMI over 30 but under 40 will also be required to reduce that figure to under 30 or lose 10 per cent of their weight before they are considered for surgery. … Smokers [must] quit for eight weeks before they are referred for surgery. A breath test will be used to detect the levels of carbon monoxide in their blood.” —Independent UK, Oct. 18 — 2017

“The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact. It’s just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does because we just don’t have enough land.” —Democrat presidential candidate scumbag-Cory Booker

scumbag-Booker, like many of his fellow Democrats, support the Green New Deal. An analysis of that plan was done by the Food & Environment Reporting Network, which noted that one section of it called for “working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible.” That work included “supporting family farming,” “investing in sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health,” and “building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food.”

First, when do people begin to understand that universal healthcare and the Green New Deal are two sides of the same power-accumulating coin? Second, when does the same Democrat Party that told Americans they could keep their doctors, hospitals, and health insurance, substitute coercion for collaboration, aimed at farmers and other food producers who remain insufficiently “woke” regarding “suggestions” that ultimately become demands?

And who is still naive enough to believe access to healthcare won’t include additional dietary — or even exercise — requirements?

Moreover, availability is also part of the equation. Those who tout systems like the aforementioned NHS apparently glide over the reality that more than 20,000 cancer patients miss out on radiotherapy every year. Why? Because the agency doesn’t refer them for it, according to a report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Radiotherapy, which further noted that a shortage of radiographers exacerbated the problem. Moreover, the NHS’s Continuing Healthcare program sounds just like America’s VA. “At least 1,000 sick, elderly or disabled people die waiting for nursing care every year,” The Express reports.

What about Canada? “Unless you live in Canada and have the dubious pleasure of experiencing the one-tier system of finding a family doctor, wait times in hospitals, wait times for imagery exams, wait times to see specialists and wait times for treatment or surgery, you can’t really appreciate the true meaning of the word ‘affordable’ in Canada’s very affordable public health care,” reveals Canadian resident Valerie Sobel. “Canada’s single-payer public health care system, heavily funded by taxpayers, forced over one million patients to wait for necessary medical treatments last year. An all-time record in a country of only 36 million. The only thing Canadians are guaranteed is a spot on a waitlist.”

America has nearly 10 times that many people, and anyone who thinks bureaucracy — what universal healthcare is really all about — gets more efficient or more compassionate as the population increases is utterly delusional.

What’s the realistic alternative? “A Powell River, [British Columbia], man with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) opted for a medically assisted death last Tuesday after years of struggling to fund 24-hour care that kept him close to his son,” the CBC website reported last month.

The man’s name was Sean Tagert. He was only 41 years old, and he had an 11-year-old son.

Why did he opt for medically assisted suicide that is legal in Canada? “Vancouver Coastal Health offered him 15.5 hours of home care under the Choice in Supports for Independent Living program but not the 24-hour care he needed,” CBC adds. “Tagert was later offered as much as 20 hours per day, which his doctor said was still not enough.”

Columnist John Ellis gets it exactly right. “A single-payer health care system will always sink to the lowest common denominator, removing choice,” he explains. “If death is more efficient for the system, then death it will be.”

But not before one is forced to abide certain requirements aimed at keeping the system more “efficient.” Today in Britain, it’s the obese and smokers who are targeted.

Tomorrow, in America? It isn’t hard to imagine the following scenario:

Mr. Smith, according to your government-provided pulsometer, data from which was automatically downloaded to the government’s healthcare evaluation website, you didn’t do the required amount of aerobic exercise this week. Until you get back on track, consider your healthcare coverage suspended.     ~The Patriot Post  

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join Tea Party Command Center