Sunday, June 26, 2016

Utter hypocrisy, Virtue Ethics and the consequence of no Due Process

The Hypocrisy of the left knows no bounds. After a failed sit-in attempt to strip Americans of their due process rights, it was revealed that every Democrat that participated owned a gun.  To verify, this author called the participants offices where it was admitted by their staff that they were indeed, gun owners. They have no shame and the willingness of staff members to freely admit this without seeing the utter hypocrisy is indicative of the fact that they are playing a game of virtue ethics. In other words they are trying to appeal to gun owners across the country that their wanting to do away with your due process rights is the superior and enlightened position.

What exactly is virtue ethics? It is the doing away of traditional morality and creating a system of moral values based on the content of character as opposed to a universal right and wrong. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy offers the following definition-

 Virtue ethics is currently one of three major approaches in normative ethics. It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in contrast to the approach which emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that which emphasizes the consequences of actions (consequentialism). Suppose it is obvious that someone in need should be helped. A utilitarian will point to the fact that the consequences of doing so will maximize well-being, a deontologist to the fact that, in doing so the agent will be acting in accordance with a moral rule such as “Do unto others as you would be done by” and a virtue ethicist to the fact that helping the person would be charitable or benevolent.

This definition describes the actions of the Democrat party perfectly, in almost all national issues. It doesn’t matter, for example, that the sit-in participants were exposed as gun owners. This fact actually aids them in their efforts to portray their cause as being of superior virtue. They are attempting to reach out to the average voter who owns guns and move them to the left by presenting their position as being the “compassionate one” while contrasting it with the right, whom they claim wants to allow terrorists to get guns because they oppose the no fly-no buy legislation.  This tactic works perfectly because no one in their right mind wants to see a weapon fall into the hands of a terrorist. This brings us to the second point about virtue ethics. The ideal of appearing morally superior and of having good intentions takes priority over the consequences of actions. The Democrats do not care what the consequences are of adding millions of people, who have no inclination to harm another human being mind you, to the terror watch list as long as their actions are in accordance with what they feel is best for society and they are viewed by voters as acting out of compassion.

Many people find themselves supporting the idea of prohibiting people on a watch list from owning guns. This author knows gun store owners who support this and in theory it makes sense. There is only one problem. It is no longer the Islamic Extremist whom our government considers terrorists. In fact, they have taken every conceivable step to change the perception of what terrorism is by removing references of Islamic Terrorism from law enforcement training manuals. Again, the issue here is virtue ethics, the Democrats are so desperate to give the impression that they are not discriminating against what they perceive to be an “oppressed group” that they have little care for the consequences, and to hide their incompetence they turn the average American, who disagrees with their positions, into the bad guy.  A document released by the Department of Homeland Security in 2009 entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” describes who the Obama Administration considers to be extremists.  Returning war veterans because they are upset about a lagging economy with no upward mobility, gun owners who are concerned there may be infringements against the second amendment, Evangelical Christians, pro- life activists, conspiracy theorists, people who question the election of Barack Obama because he is the first black president and constitutionalists who believe in limited federal government and localized control. Take heed America, these are the people Obama and the extreme left want to put on the watch list and prevent from owning weapons because they are afraid of being exposed. It should also be noted that Department of Homeland Security Advisor Gamal Abdel-Hafiz is a Muslim who when working with the FBI in 2002, refused to conduct surveillance on suspected Islamic terrorists.

What is that’s really at stake here? We have a government labeling its own citizens as potential extremists for knowing their rights while ignoring the real threat from people who admit they want to kill us. In the mean time, Democrat politicians, in an effort to show how compassionate they are about safety stage a sit in begging to do away with the due process protections of the Fifth Amendment.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Many Americans assume that they because they have nothing to worry about this will never affect them. This is foolish thinking, due process along with the entire bill of rights was put in place to ensure that the people retained a power over the government, and that human dignity would be protected. Without due process and other constitutional protections the government has the power to do as it wishes and recent history has demonstrated that governments should never have that much power. If you think that adding people to watch lists and depriving people of certain liberties, or even confiscating guns from innocent people are good ideas then perhaps you should watch the film below and read the Constitution.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

The Changing of Loyalties and Destruction of American Values

Forward: It must seem that I am repeating the same things over and over again. I am deliberately trying to deliver the same message because I am genuinely trying to awaken as many people as I can to what is happening in our country. Joseph Goebbels believed a lie told often enough would be accepted as truth; I am hoping that telling the truth over and over again will awaken people from the continuous lies . Nothing is as it seems in this country, you could say that we are in a sense, being hypnotized through fear and propaganda into accepting things we don’t fully understand. In order to save our country we have to accept that we are the targets of a psychological warfare campaign designed to change the way you feel about yourself and your country, to breakdown your morale so you have no idea how to defend the principles you once believed in. It is a battle for hearts and minds and if you choose to opt out, you aid in the destruction of liberty.
David Risselada

You can change their loyalties by Psychopolitics. Given a short time with a Psychopolitician you can alter forever the loyalty of a soldier in our hands or a statesman or a leader in his own country, or you can destroy his mind. Lavrentiy Beria pp. 3

Things are unraveling at a rapid pace, many are wondering if we will make it to the 2016 elections to rid ourselves of this radical madman destroying our country.  Violent protests continue to erupt at Donald Trump rallies, protests which of course are funded by George Soros, the threat of Isis hovers over our heads and the attacks against our constitution and the sovereignty of our nation continue unabated. In fact, out of fear and uncertainty a large portion of the electorate is literally begging the government to do away with their constitutional protections to not only keep and bear arms, but to due process as well. In very predictable fashion, our elected representatives are marching in lock step with this agenda. This is expected of the Democrats; however, the Republicans were elected to be the check and balance against Obama and they have caved on every single issue since they were given power. Are they in on the deliberate destruction of the country? Certainly some of them are; however, there is something else going on. America is being governed by people highly skilled in the Communist art of Psychopolitics and they have ways of ensuring people remain loyal to their agenda.

“Psychopolitics: The art and science of asserting and maintaining dominion over the thoughts and loyalties of individuals, officers, bureaus and masses, and the effecting of the conquest of enemy nations through mental healing.”

What does it mean to assert and maintain the thoughts and loyalties of people? It means psychologically persuading them to go along with an agenda they may otherwise reject. Communists believe that everything should be done for the betterment of government. There is no higher power than the state; therefore, loyalty simply means alignment with state or Communist goals. Those skilled in psychopolitics employ methods that ensure those disloyal to Communist goals re-align their loyalties, knowingly or not, to assist in their agenda. Lavrentiy Beria, author of the Manual on Psychopolitics, gives an example by describing an unhealthy body part being out of alignment with the whole body. He refers to the surgical procedure as a “shock” treatment of sorts and that after surgery the unhealthy body part is now aligned with the main body. What does this have to do with the way people think? Well, imagine if the efforts of the media and the opinions of the masses could be used as a form of shock therapy to change the loyalties of people that were supposed to be fighting for American values? That is exactly what is going on.

According to Beria, loyalties can be changed by first eradicating previous loyalties. This can be done by creating a mental association between the previous loyalty and some form of duress which is said to be caused by that loyalty. In other words, creating a panic about the second amendment, for example, and using the media to portray gun ownership as evil, coupled by the constant exposure to slaughter of helpless victims, can be a powerful motivator in realigning loyalties.  Consider the following paragraph from the Manual on Psychopolitics.

There is the creation of a state of mind in the individual, by actually placing him under duress, and then furnishing him with false evidence to demonstrate that the target of his previous loyalties is, itself, the course of the duress. Another portion of the same method consists of defaming or degrading the individual whose loyalties are to be changed to the target of his loyalties, i.e. superiors or government, to such a degree that this target, at length, actually does hold the individual in disrepute, and so does rebuff him and serve to convince him that his loyalties have been misplaced. These are the milder methods but have proven to be very effective. The greatest drawback in their practice is that they require time and concentration, the manufacture of false evidence, and the psychopoltical operator’s time.

Not only is this being applied against our politicians in an effort to get the legislation they want passed, it’s being done on a national level to discredit the United States as a whole.  Barack Obama has continuously blamed our constitution for the problems we now face. Through this type of mental manipulation we now have college students begging for the eradication of the First Amendment because free speech can be offensive, we have a once rugged, individualistic people begging the government to keep them safe and we have politicians who swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution selling out because they are afraid of how it may look to support principles that are falsely being labeled as harmful to the country.

B.F. Skinner wrote in Beyond Freedom and Dignity that manipulation of the environment can be a powerful way to influence people’s behavior. He refers to the desire to be accepted, and that the fear of not being accepted can be used as a means of control. This is exactly what is going on in America. Our environment is being changed deliberately to give the impression that America, and its founding principles is the cause of our stress, and if we would simply realign our loyalties to fit the needs of our masters, all would be fine. Our policy makers are furnished with false evidence that suggests the masses wish to align themselves with loyalties which are contrary to the principles the nation was founded upon.

People who get along together well under the mild contingencies of approval and disapproval are controlled as effectively as (and in many ways more effectively than) the citizens of a police state. Orthodoxy controls through the establishment of rules, but the mystic is no freer because the contingencies which have shaped his behavior are more personal or idiosyncratic. Those who work productively because of the reinforcing value of what they produce are under the sensitive and powerful control of the products. Those who learn in the natural environment are under a form of control as powerful as any control exerted by a teacher. (Skinner, 91)

This is how you change a nation from one of liberty to servitude. You make the people beg for it by changing the environment in which they live into one of danger and uncertainty, blame it on their freedom and offer Communism as a solution.

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, distrust, economic depression and scientific turmoil. At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses. (Lavrentiy Beria, pp. 3)

Sunday, June 12, 2016

Another Shooting, the Lefts Belief in Evolution, and the Manual on Psychopolitics

Well here we go again. What we all feared would happen because of the unfettered immigration and transplanting of refugees into the United States has happened. On Sunday morning, in Orland Florida, fifty people were shot in a gay night club by suspect Omar Mateen, who authorities believe has ties to radical Islam.  Reports indicate that it took police hours to arrive to the scene, which developed into a hostage situation in the meantime. Reporters say that police storming the bar saved countless lives, however: many will wonder how many could have been saved if more people exercised their right to carry. The time it took police to respond is exactly why people need to take responsibility for their own protection. Ironically, according to, ISIS made a threat against Florida just three days ago. Well, we all know the attitude of the current administration; never let a good crisis go to waste.

Undoubtedly, the Obama administration, as well as Hillary Clinton, will hunker down on their message of gun control and launch a full frontal assault. Congressional Republicans will do little to shut them up, as usual. They should be tried for treason against the United States for allowing President Obama to get away with what he has. Is it mere coincidence that this shooting occurred after the U.N was here discussing ways to implement gun control, and, after the 9th circuit court ruled there was no constitutional right to concealed carry? If you’re a tin foil hat wearer, then no, it’s not a coincidence.

To Second Amendment advocates, the issue is an open and shut case. The right to bear arms exists to protect life from those that do not value it, period. There are countless times when firearms are used by innocent law abiding citizens in the act of self defense. Women use firearms to prevent rape countless times every year, yet we are constantly told by the left that people should not have the right to own, let alone, carry guns. This is quite a contrast that truly defines the beliefs between the left and right. One values life, the other does not. If you ever wonder how much value the left has for your life just look at their support for abortion. Senate Democrats recently supported a bill allowing an abortion for a fetus that is nine months along. Yeah, they love life so much that the life of a newborn means nothing to them if it gives them political power.

The difference is really quite simple to explain. The right believes people are capable of self governance, are compassionate and able to act with goodwill towards their fellow man. We believe in a definite morality that defines good and evil because we believe in God. We believe in personal responsibility and that all life has value, and in most cases, when left to their own devises people will do good things. The left on the other hand believes in Darwinian evolution which says God does not exist and that man is no different than an animal that has to be trained. They believe that man has to be controlled and they do not differentiate between good and evil. To them, there are no good people because we are all subject to our animalistic instincts and that any moment, anyone carrying a gun can turn into a raving lunatic and commit mass murder. They despise Christianity and they hate the idea of an absolute morality that defines good and evil. The left believes in psychology and psychiatry, and that mans entire behavior can be controlled through the stimulus-response mechanism discovered by Ivan Pavlov. Not only do they believe this, they want you to believe it as well. Consider the following quote from Brainwashing-A Synthesis on the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics.

Man is a stimulus-response animal. His entire reasoning capabilities, even his ethics and morals, depend upon stimulus-response machinery. This has long been demonstrated by such Russians as Pavlov, and the principles have long been used in handling the recalcitrant, in training children, and in bringing about a state of optimum behavior on the part of a population.

What does it mean to bring about optimum behavior in a population? Well, looking at the idea of stimulus-response mechanisms it is easy to conclude that the very environment in which we live is constantly being manipulated in order to force reactions and change behavior. There is a huge difference when you describe human behavior from a point of view that credits God, and one that believes strictly in the inhumanity of science. Consider the following quote from B.F Skinners Beyond Freedom and Dignity.

In the scientific view (and the word is not necessarily honorific) a person’s behavior is determined by a genetic endowment traceable to the evolutionary history of the species and by the environmental circumstances to which as an individual he has been exposed. Neither view can be proved, but it is in the nature of scientific inquiry that the evidence should shift in favor of the second. As we learn more about the effects of the environment, we have less reason to attribute any part of human behavior to an autonomous controlling agent. And the second view shows a marked advantage when we begin to do something about behavior. Autonomous man is not easily changed: in fact, to the extent that he is autonomous, he is by definition not changeable at all. But the environment can be changed, and we are learning how to change it. The measures we use are those of physical and biological technology, but we use them in special ways to affect behavior. (Skinner, 101)

Our environment is currently being manipulated on many levels to cause the most shock and terror in the consciousness of man in order to optimize human behavior in favor of government objectives. The economy is deliberately being collapsed, our country is deliberately being flooded with those who do not share our values, and in many cases have threatened to carry out the type of attacks we have just witnessed. The media is aiding and abetting by keeping the worst news possible in our faces all day and night in order to affect the way we see our world. Consider what the Manual on Psychopolitics has to say.

The mechanisms of stimulus-response can be easily understood. The body takes pictures of every action in the environment around an individual. When the environment includes brutality, terror, shock, and other such activities, the mental image picture gained contains in itself all the ingredients of the environment. If the individual himself was injured during that moment, the injury itself will re-manifest when called upon to respond by an exterior command source.

What does this mean? It means constant exposure to every terrorist attack and mass shooting through the television media causes traumatic injury to the human consciousness. People are living in a state of panic and uncertainty through the stimulus-response mechanism with the end goal being a voluntary surrender of our liberties, surrendering liberty for security in other words. The only way to combat this is to first understand that this is in fact, what is occurring. Secondly, understand that there is an objective and that objective is changing the geo-political make up of the country. They want you to believe that we cannot be free. They want you to believe that man must be controlled for our own safety. They want you to believe that communism is the solution. You must educate yourself and be ready to defend American principles. Allowing yourself to be silenced because you are unable to articulate what you believe only aides in their efforts. Stand up America, time is short.

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum amount of chaos in the culture of our enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, mistrust, economic depression and scientific turmoil. At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist state, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses. Laventia Beria.

Saturday, June 11, 2016

The Long Game of Cultural Change and the Second Amendment

The right to life and liberty, these are the hallmark traits that for over two hundred years defined America and her citizens. Wars were fought to establish these principles; that men were capable of living a life of self governance, and that the dignity of each individual was more important than that of the collective. Our founders recognized that individual human beings possessed great ability and if left to their own devises in an environment of freedom, they would most times, act with moral restraint, recognizing that freedom required personal responsibility.  Times are changing and our country no longer represents these principles.

Recently, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to carry a concealed weapon for self defense. This ruling not only violates the constitution, it goes against the very principles of life and liberty. It has long been assumed that personal protection was the responsibility of the individual, not the government. In fact, this has been the ruling in several Supreme Court cases. In Warren vs. The District of Columbia, for example, the Supreme Court ruled that a government is under no obligation to provide protective services to individual citizens. In Lynch vs. N.C. Department of Justice it was determined that police are only obligated to arrest criminals, not prevent criminal acts against individuals. Finally in Castle Rock vs. Gonzales it was found that an individual is not entitled to police protection even under a restraining order. In other words, you are on your own when it comes to personal protection. This is why the Second Amendment is so important, the right to keep and bear arms strikes directly at the heart of protecting life. How can you have a right to life if the ability to defend it is being taken from you? You simply can’t, once that right is gone you are no longer the master of your own destiny.

The Second Amendment is a right that must be fought for at all costs. Sadly, many people may not realize the many fronts our gun rights are being assaulted from.  While people know the ruling by the 9th Circuit Court was wrong, they fail to see that the ruling is made to apply to future generations. The left is incredibly patient; they know that right now that ruling will have little sway over people, even the states it presides over, with a few exceptions. They also know however, what they are teaching your children about this country and gun ownership in particular, and that when these children grow up they will very likely accept a ruling like the one made by the 9th court. The left is playing a long game of cultural change where our liberties are lost at such an incremental pace, generation to generation, that no one seems to notice.

The very definition of what it means to be an American, what the constitution means, and what rights we have are all changing right before our very eyes through our education system.  For example, high school text books are re-writing the Second Amendment, giving it an entire different meaning. U.S. History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Exam defines the Second Amendment as something that only applies to state militias. The Amendment reads as follows in this textbook. “The people have the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.” The word state, of course, implies an entity in control of the militia. This would equate to a standing army which was something the founders were adamantly opposed to.  The Constitution, for example, only authorizes the funding of a standing army for two years. After that period funding would have to be reauthorized. Another book suggests that people have the right to own guns provided they register them with the government, and yet another gives the student the opportunity to revise the Bill of Rights while suggesting they are outdated.  This is how they slowly change the culture.

Another way our education system is indoctrinating our children is by punishing them for having anything to do with a firearm. For example, Josh Welch was suspended from school for biting a pop-tart into the shape of a gun. This is happening on a frequent basis across our country, kids are being suspended for wearing shirts portraying guns, bringing toy guns to school, drawing pictures of guns and even playing cowboys and Indians. Not only that, they are also inflicting fear and panic by conducting intruder on campus drills, or active-shooter drills where they are taught to run and hide. While it is one thing to conduct drills for preparedness, it is something else entirely to deliberately induce panic. (Author’s note: As a substitute teacher I witnessed this very thing. I can say with great confidence that these drills are being conducted to teach kids to fear firearms.) The end result of this indoctrination could likely be a weakened population ready and willing to surrender their firearms because they have been taught to fear them.

The left has been chipping away at our culture for the past one hundred years. Little by little they have infiltrated our institutions and changed the very nature of what it means to be an American.  When Barack Obama said we were five days away from fundamentally transforming America, he meant he was here to put the final touches on a process of social change that has turned America from a nation of rugged individualism to one where people beg the government to provide them safety. This is evident by observing what is taking places in our colleges and how Americans are now offended by everything.  The kids now begging for safe spaces are our future policy makers, politicians, police officers and soldiers. After a lifetime of anti-gun indoctrination it is unlikely that their positions will change.  We can petition our government and stage protests all we want. As long as the left controls education we will lose the country.

Sunday, June 5, 2016

Psychiatry: The True Origins of Racism

The left continues to push the narrative that America is a racist nation. They insist that it is because of our history with slavery that black people are unable to rise out of poverty to become productive members of society. Terms like “white privilege” dominate our educational institutions while teaching whites are inherently privileged, and that our institutions unconsciously discriminate against blacks and other minorities. Backwards academic theories like Black Liberation Theology and Critical Race Theory justify the idea  that black people are entitled to special treatment like affirmative action. Black Liberation Theology is Marxist in origin and pushes the idea that white people care little for the humanity of blacks and that minorities have no institutional or political power in America because we believe that they are unable to integrate into our society. The problem is that all of this is true, America did discriminate against black people, and our history is one where blacks were considered inferior to white people; however, it’s the origins of this thinking that the left continually lies about. While they continue to push the idea that it was our founding fathers that sought to subjugate the black man, the truth is that the origins of racism stem from the fields of psychology and psychiatry.

Under Barack Obama, blacks are doing worse economically then before he took office. This is because he continues to push the idea that blacks are entitled to what other people work for, and in a sick twisted kind of way, Obama is supporting the idea that blacks are not as capable as whites and that in order for them to be successful, they need government help. In other words, Obama is pushing the victimhood mindset. By justifying the type of violence we have seen in response to the Ferguson and Baltimore incidents, Obama is keeping racism alive by supporting the stereotypical view of blacks he claims all white people have.  Barack Obama is also a big supporter of abortion, which has its origins in the eugenics movement. Blacks and other minorities are by far the biggest recipients of abortions as Planned Parenthood clinics are found mostly in minority, or poor neighborhoods. In New York City more black babies are typically aborted than born alive. It is the opinion of this writer that the left is carrying on the eugenics movement and its chief goal is, as Margret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood once said, is the elimination of the unfit. Psychiatrists and psychologists have long believed that blacks and other minorities are unfit races.

The term eugenics was first used by an English psychiatrist named Francis Galton. The term itself comes from the Greek word eugenes meaning to come from better, or good stock. Galton believed that only the healthiest and attractive people should be able to breed in order to prevent those he considered to be unfit from infecting the gene pool. He considered black people to be inferior as he viewed them in their African homeland as lacking any independence and wanting to be ruled over, or enslaved. Galton was related to Charles Darwin, founder of the theory of evolution. Darwin shared the view that men were not created equal and that blacks were lower on the evolutionary scale than whites were. This makes sense because Darwin believed that men were no different than any other animal on Earth, so in his mind, blacks are a lower form of human evolution. Evolution, not creation is the accepted theory of mans origins which is taught in our schools. It is the left that controls our schools, not conservative Christians, so already we see that it is the left wing that supports the view that certain races are inferior. The teaching of white privileges supports this idea as well. Only an elite group of people who believe that one race is more dominant than another would come up with such a curriculum. The Democrat Party is working hard, through the teaching of white privilege and eugenics, to teach blacks that without government they would not succeed and would remain victims of the so called “white supremacists;” however, it is the welfare dependency and victimhood mentality that truly enslaves the modern black man.

The idea that blacks cannot be free and need government to survive comes from a man considered to be the father of modern psychiatry, Benjamin Rush.  Rush coined the term “negritude,” which he considered to be a disease black people suffered from similar to leprosy. Interestingly enough, according to the website blackmail4u Rush wrote that white people should not tyrannize over black people but because of negritude, blacks should receive double of what humanity has to offer. This seems to be the prevailing attitude as blacks are being taught they are entitled to reparations while being organized by the left to demand government fund their educations and a higher standard of living all around. In other words, the left is teaching black people to beg for servitude.

The term Drapetomania refers to a condition assigned to black slaves who attempted to escape the plantation. It was considered a mental illness for a black person to not accept servitude because of the wide spread belief pushed by the fields of psychiatry and psychology that blacks were inferior and unable to be free. Today there is prevailing belief among the black victomology crowd that any black person that has left the Democrat Party, and campaigns for Republican or conservative beliefs, has somehow left the plantation and is not authentically black. This stems from the belief that black people are inferior and seek a life of servitude because they are unable to adapt to modern western society. In the nineteenth century, according to author Robert Whittaker, slaves who desired to live as free independent men were viewed as being mentally insane; this was also true for freed slaves who moved to independent states where there was no slavery. According to an 1840 census, blacks were 11 times more likely to be considered insane than whites. This no doubt was driven by the belief in the term Drapetomania, and the idea that blacks prefer servitude. This belief has been carried into our modern era as the proportionality of blacks living on government dependency far outweighs that of white people. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson created what is remembered as the “Great Society” which is the cause of so many black people being dependent on welfare. He created the dependency system purely for the purpose of perpetuating a permanent underclass of voters. It was the Great Society programs which broke up the black family and left government playing the role that the black father should have played. Before this time blacks predominately voted Republican and had stronger families than whites.  Lyndon Johnson will always be remembered, in this writer’s mind, as the president who said this when referring to his new “Great Society Program.”

Because of psychiatry, eugenics and the theory of evolution, racism is still alive and well in America, it just isn’t coming from where the left would like you to believe. It is in fact, coming from the things they believe in.  Another area of psychiatry where this is self evident is the use of psychotropic drugs among our children.  According to the Citizens Commission on Human Rights black children are three times more likely to be labeled with learning disorders than white children. Could this be due to the belief established by evolutionists and psychiatrists? These learning disabilities, which are listed in the DSM (Diagnostic Statistical Manual) are used as justification for hooking our children on powerful, mind altering psychotropic medications, which in reality, do more harm than good. Our minority neighborhoods are left impoverished with people living generation to generation in poverty and dependent on government welfare.

Conservative America believes in the ideals which this nation was founded on. We believe that given freedom, and the right conditions which create opportunity, anybody can live up to their fullest potential and make a life for themselves. It is clearly the left, and their belief in eugenics, psychiatry, psychology and Darwinian evolution that have led to the belief that blacks and other minorities are not as capable as white people, and that government power will always be needed to create fairness in a world dominated by so called white supremacy.  They are also using psychological propaganda to anger their base by convincing them of such nonsense and encouraging them to organize for this government power, by doing this they are creating resentment amongst the rest of the population that could be viewed as racism. They are convincing them of their alleged inferiority by insisting they are owed a living by the white man because of the so called “privilege” of being white. Clearly it is the left that believes blacks are inferior to whites and to hide this truth they are using the media, education and every other institution under their control to push their racism onto America as a whole in an effort to aid in the fundamental transformation promised by Barrack Obama.