DOUGLAS V. GIBBS             RADIO             BOOKS             CONSTITUTION             CONTACT/FOLLOW             DONATE

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Alt-Right Charlottesville Killer Actually Hillary Supporting Alt-Left Operative

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Media says: The violent fracas ended in bloodshed when a 20-year-old suspected Nazi sympathizer, James Fields, plowed his car into a crowd of anti-racism protesters, leaving one woman dead and 19 others injured.

Question.  Is James Fields a Nazi sympathizer?  Or was he a part of a false flag attempt by the left to create more chaos?

The media says the following is completely false.  I am not so convinced. . . 

First of all, not that I am condoning the wanton attack with a vehicle, but Fields was attacked by baseball bats. . . so if the story being reported was completely honest, the violence by the obvious leftists would have been reported too.  I am still trying to figure out how it was the police had the opinion, "Oh, hey, baseball bats in the hands of protesters and agitators.  No problem.  No danger, here.  Let's do nothing about it."

Hey, what could go wrong?

That said, reports are emerging, and information is being hidden, about the attacker.  According to some reports, the Charlottesville killer is a Soros funded member of antifa and Hillary Clinton supporter.

Hmmmm, I wonder why the media hasn't been telling us about that little nugget of news?  Think about this, for a moment.  James Fields used his car to kill Heather Heyer and injure 19 others possibly for the purpose of furthering the hard left agenda by creating chaos and death and hoping it would be pinned on the "Alt-Right", which in reality are a bunch of Alt-Leftists.

How sick can the liberal left Democrats truly get?

ACLU confirms that police were given stand-down order. This invited the violence the city used to shut down a court-permitted protest. 

Driver of Charlottesville vehicle was Alex James Fields, democrat, Hillary supporter, ANTIFA member
Who scrubbed all of his facebook-twitter and why? He was arrested...he did not remove the content. REEKS of a setup/false flag 

Obama didn't disavow BLM after they destroyed Ferguson & Baltimore.
Quite the contrary.
He invited them to White House! 

In short, Saul Alinsky agitation, and leftist false flag, may be in play, here. Nobody in the Charlottesville rallies were conservative.  The attempt is to pin the blame on conservatives in the hopes of taking away the right of conservatives to lawfully organize rallies and assemble peacefully.
If it doesn't work, they will try, try again.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Tonight: Corona Constitution Class Starts From The Beginning

Douglas V. Gibbs, Instructor.

In the Beginning delegates from 12 of the 13 Original States met at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to fix the Articles of Confederation. After weeks of arguments, Benjamin Franklin suggested they pray before each session. After that, the miracle happened.

A new journey of Constitutional Literacy begins 6:00 pm, Tuesday, August 15, at AllStar Collision, 522 Railroad Street, Corona, California. The cost to join our Constitution Study Group is $0. Monetary contributions are welcomed, but are not necessary.

All attendees receive a free pocket constitution, and handouts with all of the information you will need to understand the owners manual of the United States of America.

We look forward to you joining us.

If you've been telling yourself, "I want to go to Doug's Constitution Classes, but I want to wait until they start at the beginning," this Tuesday is your opportunity.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

North Korea Backs Off From Guam Threat

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

The lesson regarding bullies and hotheads: strength and a firm hand usually makes them back down.  In the case of the pudgy dictator in North Korea, and his threat against Guam, Trump did not back down, so Kim Jong Un did.

The North Korean media is reporting that the communist dictator has decided to delay a decision to fire missiles toward Guam, a decision that came hours after a strong warning from Defense Secretary James Mattis.  In short, Mattis promised further escalation by North Korea would mean “game on” from the point of view of the United States.
Kim Jong Un also released a statement about backing off, a statement that followed President Trump's promise of “fire and fury” if North Korea continued to threaten the United States.

“It could escalate into war very quickly,” Mattis said. “…Yes, that’s called war, if they shoot at us.”

A firm reaction by the U.S. to North Korea's threats were echoed by South Korea and Japan, and Japan went so far as to move around their missile defense systems to meet the threat.

We must remember, the very fact that North Korea even has the technology to threaten us in the first place can be traced back to Democrat Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Erasing Confederate History is Erasing Democrat Party Sins

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

The liberal left's desire to tear down any and all memories of the Confederate States of America is reaching a crescendo.  Statues are being torn down.  State flags are being redesigned and burned.  According to the Democrats, and their Black Lives Matter brethren, all vestiges of the dark time when the Southern States practiced slavery must be stricken from record.

There's an old saying. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.  You can’t truly erase history.  Shouldn't we seek to learn from it.

In truth, the leftist's crusade is not about erasing history as much as it is about erasing the historical sins of the Democrat Party's past.

The goal is complete erasure of the sins of the Democrat Party, and the true history of liberty and equality of the Republican Party.  It is the progressive left's goal to eventually have the mobs convinced that it wasn't even the Republican Party that was the political party which was created to abolish slavery, in the first place.

Google has already begun the effort.  If you Google "What political party did Abraham Lincoln belong to," the answer you will get from Google is "National Union Party" (see image to the above-left), not the Republican Party (Abraham Lincoln was the first GOP president).

The mob reminds me of the Nazis and communists, acting under the cover of darkness seeking to do what they can to erase anything that does not make their ideology look great.  They seek to take down any statues or monuments depicting individuals who were connected to the Confederacy.   It's like the Muslims wanting to take down the Great Pyramids, and other historical sites, because it's not Islamic.  Except, there is a difference.  The Democrats don't want to take down all remnants of the Confederacy because its not in line with the belief system of their party; they want to take down all remnants of the Confederacy because every last piece of it is a reminder of who the Democrats truly are.  They are the party of slavery.  They are the party of the KKK.  They are the party of Jim Crow Laws.  They are the party of bondage and authoritarianism.  They want their history erased so that they can remake it in a new false image.  A false image they've been trying to push since the sixties, but one that only the ill-informed has fallen for.

The pawns, the tools, the idiots who fall for the Democrat Party rhetoric cheer when images of the confederate flag, confederate statues, and confederate monuments are taken down and destroyed.  They cheer, not even realizing that the ones they follow in the Democrat Party are not only the ones connected to slavery in our past, but to bondage in our present ... it's just that now, the bondage is through government dependency.

In other words, the Democrat Party Plantation still exists, but instead of the slave-master being a rich southern Democrat plantation owner, the slave-master is now a rich Democrat politician.

In addition to hiding the Democrat Party's historical connection to slavery, the cleansing is also a direct attack on the South.  The South used to be solidly Democrat, but now that the once Confederate pro-slavery, pro-Democrat southern States have abandoned the Democrats, the leftists have determined the South must pay the price for their betrayal.

In the latter part of the twentieth century the southern States began to finally take advantage of manufacturing and production, and as the free market took off in the South, by the late nineties they were ready to start voting Republican (the Southern Strategy/Dixiecrat shift is a myth, by the way) because when it comes to capitalism, it turns out that like the communists, the Democrats hate the free market economy.  So, since the South has become economically prosperous chasing the American Dream, and have abandoned the Democrats, the Democrats have determined the South must be whipped into submission.  What better way to do that then to wipe out any pride Southerners should have in their heritage?  It's the same strategy as we are seeing at the colleges.  Anything European is being demonized. The left is pushing the "white privilege" concoction from their cauldron of steaming racism, and they are using the strategy so as to rewrite history through their own vision of hard left socialist progressive religiosity.

The snowflakes demand safe spaces and free speech zones because political correctness dictates that all things not progressive is offensive and hurtful.

The thing is, it won't last.  Eventually, liberty will reveal itself to them, and the Democrats will reveal how dark and tyrannical they truly are.

Either that, or true tyranny will take place and anything that disagrees with the Democrats will be silenced, jailed, and eventually executed gestapo-style.

The Democrats don't care about the Constitution, or Americanism.  It's about power, and they are willing to do anything it takes to gain it.

As for the assault against history, it goes way beyond the confederacy.  It has become identity politics on steroids.  The way to destroy liberty is to destroy the history, especially if the hero in history is a dead white European male. . .

My buddy John L. Hancock tells a story in his Distortion of History presentation about how the confrontation visited Alfred University way back in 1991:
In the fall of 1991, the relatively small and quiet university of Alfred University in New York State was engrossed in controversy.  Indignant professors led students in protests, heated debates raged throughout the divided campus, editorials filled the school and local papers. At the heart of the controversy was the newly-installed statue of King Alfred, the medieval English monarch after whom the town and school was named. Ten years prior, when the monument was commissioned, no one could foresee the controversy it would eventually cause. Yet, its placement offended the sensibilities of the university's history professors. 
By the strong and negative reaction one would think that Alfred must have been a tyrant, an oppressor of his people, a man deserving of the title Alfred the Terrible. Surprisingly, it is the opposite that that is true. 
From 871 to 899, Alfred was the King of Wessex, one of the four kingdoms that would eventually become England. During his reign he revived the tradition of learning that had died with the fall of the Roman Empire. He required all of his nobles be literate and increased their education by translating the great Latin texts into English. Additionally, he has the honor of being the first king in English history to write a book, preceding King James by eight centuries. Thus, he is known as the "education king." 
More significantly, for the first time, English law would be written and would establish the tradition of England being a land 'ruled by laws' rather than by the whims of powerful men. Within these laws we find the genesis the principles of due process, trial by jury, and respect for the individual; no matter how lowly. His laws protected the commoner from arbitrary and excessive punishment. Even slaves were protected by his laws. There were limits on the number of hours they could be forced to work and were granted 37 work-free holidays per year. Furthermore, the slaves were allowed to work on their own behalf and retain all proceeds from their endeavors. Through the church, Alfred created a system that fed the poor and provided them with medical care. 
For the 9th century, Alfred was a very enlightened king who was loved by his people and for this reason he is the only king in English history to be bestowed the moniker "the Great." Alfred the Great, the father of England and education king.

So why would the history professors be opposed to a memorial to this great proponent of education? 
The truth is that the opposition to Alfred had more to do with what he symbolizes rather than actual history. Linda Mitchell, who specializes in Medieval history, was one of the protesting professors. As she explained in a New York Times interview, Alfred "is not a good logo to promote a modern university because virtually any historical figure who had any social or political influence is undoubtedly going to be a D.W.E.M. -- dead white European male," she said, "it would be foolish to choose a symbol so exclusive and effective in emphasizing the straight white male power structure of history." 
For Alfred, being a DWEM (Dead White European Male) means that his great achievements are to be ignored because they do not fit into the ideologically-driven, anti-Western civilization, revisionist history that is currently being taught in schools.
Sadly, Alfred U is not the only place in academia where the truth is sacrificed to the ideology of leftism.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Monday, August 14, 2017

Omar Navarro, speaks in Murrieta

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

This morning at a conservative leadership meeting I attend each Monday Morning in Murrieta, California, our guest was Omar Navarro.  Mr. Navarro is currently the only Republican in the race to go up against Maxine Waters of the 43rd Congressional District in California.  This is Navarro's second try to beat the Democrat, but this time he believes he has enough of a ground game, and money coming in, to complete the job and defeat her.

Speaking to him, he gave all of the right answers when it came to policy and platform.  He's conservative, Christian, and according to Alex Jones, Navarro might have a legitimate chance to beat Waters in the 2018 Election.

So, if Navarro is the lead Republican, and at the moment the only Republican in the race challenging Maxine Waters for her congressional seat, why has the Los Angeles County Republican leadership refused to support him?  Why has the party refused to help him financially?  The LA County GOP has even blocked Navarro on Twitter.

Did they find out Navarro is a liberal in conservative clothing?  Has he broken the 11th Commandment, and went after fellow Republicans when he shouldn't have?  Did he emerge as a secret supporter of Amnesty?  Did he dare to act in a manner that is not within the good graces of the party's leadership?

I had an opportunity to speak with someone who knows because he's a part of that leadership, and from what I understand, the Republican Party leadership has a number of complaints.  According to that source, Navarro had harsh things to say about fellow Republicans, he's also allegedly too harsh with his conservative talk (talking about building Trump's Wall in a district with a huge Democrat Mexican presence who finds talk about the wall offensive), and besides the seat is unwinnable by Republicans so why give him any support?  Why waste the money and energy?

I respect greatly the source I spoke to.  He is an incredible individual, and a sound conservative.  I kind of see his points regarding Navarro.  But, does Reagan's 11th Commandment apply to Republicans who have betrayed the Republican Platform?  Is it possible the elements within the Republican Party Navarro was addressing have abandoned the GOP platform and are too busy trying to play the "we don't want to offend the independents" game too much?  Are they sure that Navarro talking about building the wall is a losing strategy?  Is it possible Navarro's crusade is not a losing one, and if only the Republican Party were to give him some support, he might have a big chance to win?

I refuse to fully take sides, at this juncture, because I am still collecting information.  But, one of the things that has been driving me nuts is the fact that as the Democrats play dirty, and in California they maintain a super-majority in Sacramento, the Republicans are fighting among themselves.  Is it possible that there is a better candidate than Navarro?  Perhaps.  But, Navarro has quite a good head start on the other candidates (if they are going to materialize).  Is it possible they are right and in the 43rd District, a purely conservative message won't sell, so you have to moderate?  Isn't that the same attitude that has kept the GOP in defeat mode until Trump proved the theory to be wrong as hell even when everyone was proclaiming Hillary Clinton was destined to win the presidency?

In the end, right now Omar Navarro is the guy we have to beat Maxine Waters.  He has the Democrat establishment against him, and possibly the Republican establishment against him.  Navarro comes across as a good guy.  He's trying to be Trump-like, I think.  That's why he's running on things like Trump's border wall.  However, Trump sometimes says things that may not help him, much.  I think there's a method to his madness, and I believe Trump's Tweets and the things he sometimes says are dangerous to his cause, and feeds the liberal left media beast.  That said, Navarro has got to stay away from that kind of thing if he wants to make sure he's not providing fuel for the Democrat Party's attack - like his recent "Wetback" comment. . . probably something that is not in his best interest.  Granted, the messages have not been verified as being his.  It may simply be a bunch of junk.  Or, Navarro may have sealed his fate with those messages.

Again, I am still trying to figure all of this out.  I don't have all of the details at the moment.  Right now, I am simply talking to people so that I can work my way to the truth.

You know the old saying.  There's always three sides to every story.  What he said, what she said, and what really happened.

That said, it is still early, as well.  There may be other candidates on the horizon.  There may be more reasons than we know of that has encouraged the L.A. County Republican Party to shy away from Navarro.  Or, Navarro might be the best candidate for this election.  He might be exactly what we need to dethrone Maxine Waters.

I have gotten to know Omar Navarro, and members of the Republican Party Leadership in Los Angeles as well as one of the possible individuals who is considering also running against Maxine Waters. . . so as this all unfolds, I will be sure to keep you posted.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Raiders' Marshawn Lynch Sat During National Anthem

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

As an Oakland Raiders fan, I have really enjoyed the start of the Jack Del Rio/Derek Carr era.  The head coach and quarterback are upstanding fellows, Christians, and all around good guys.  Both are firm leaders, with impeccable work ethics.

Aside from a questionable defense, among the notches that needed to be filled was a star running back.  In 2016, Latavius Murray did a great job, and going into the final game of the season, the Raiders were 12 and 3.  Not bad for a team that had been dusting the cellar for a dozen years, and was operating with a third-year quarterback.  Unfortunately, Carr went down with a broken leg, and the loss of his skills and leadership was devastating.

Murray is gone and Marshawn "Beast Mode" Lynch said he wanted to be a member of the Raiders after a year of retirement, and as a move from Oakland to Las Vegas looms on the horizon for the Silver and Black.

One thing is for sure.  If it is down to the final play with the ball very close to the end zone, the Raiders won't be hesitating to give the ball to the Beast Mode.

Excitement has been echoing down the halls of the Raider Nation.  Lynch is just what the doctor ordered.

Lynch did not play the other day, but he was at the game, and during the National Anthem of the first pre-season game, at Phoenix, Lynch sat during the National Anthem.

Freedom of Speech is a funny thing.  It's great when people agree with you, but not so much when they don't.  The whole Colin Kaepernick thing has had me fuming, but as much as I hate it when people don't appreciate this country enough for the liberties it has given them to give it some respect, I also understand that it is their freedom to believe and say what they want regarding the American System.  The willingness to allow a difference of opinion, and to debate those issues without having to worry about some kind of authoritarian gestapo showing up, is a part of what makes America great.

I wondered, knowing that kind of patriotic guy Jack Del Rio is, how he would react.  His reaction was perfect.

Jack Del Rio said, regarding his conversation with Lynch afterwards, "He said, 'This is something I've done for 11 years - it's not a form of anything other than me being myself.'  I said, 'So you understand how I feel, I very strongly believe in standing for the national anthem, but I'm gonna respect you as a man. You do your thing, OK, and we'll do ours.' "

Del Rio let the player know how he felt about it, but gave Lynch respect for his decision.  It's not something Del Rio agrees with, but he's going to respect his player's decision. That's all a player can ask from his coach.

And, while Lynch has spoken out in support of Colin Kaepernick, it's not like Lynch just jumped on this anti-patriotism band wagon of Colin's.  He has his own reasons, and if anything, Lynch has been consistent about it his entire career.

I get it.  The history of blacks in America is one not necessarily of voluntary arrival.  They came in chains on slave ships.  The dark part of America's era of slavery existed, and blacks are the descendants of those slaves.  But, America corrected its error.  America was willing to fight a war, and slaughter nearly 700,000 people, to correct that error.

When my children made mistakes, I didn't stop loving them because they made those mistakes.  I simply appreciated the fact that they learned from their mistakes, and repented.

God does the same for us, as well.  He forgives us, loves us, and all he asks is that we repent.

I am not trying to compare slavery to raising children, or the Christian Faith.  They are all very different things.  But I am trying to compare the love of my children and God's love to us to patriotism.  While America had to battle with slavery, something the British encouraged and most of the Founding Fathers hated England for, largely because of our desire for freedom, and largely because of our belief that "all men are created equal," the United States confronted that evil, and corrected the error.

Now, the claim is that blacks are still downtrodden, and that the white police out there are targeting blacks (the motivation for Colin Kaepernick's actions against the National Anthem).

Left out of the conversation are a great number of things, such as black on black killings, or the fact that the 44th President of the United States was black, yet these conflicts arose under his watch.  The way to heal is not division, or refusal to recognize the greatness of this country.  The way to heal is to unite, reach out, and work it out together.

Unfortunately, Kaepernick and Lynch have fallen for an old tactic by statists.  Divide and conquer.  Class warfare.  Identity politics.

But, Del Rio is right.  I believe what I believe, and it is your decision to join with me, or stand apart.  It is a free country, after all.  Just. . . be aware of the real message being sent out.  One of division.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary