Tag Archives: Bill Lockwood

Bill Lockwood: Ridin’ With Biden Into a Recession 4.5 (2)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

It is curious to hear the frequent refrain that Biden’s Presidency is a dismal failure. It is a simple formula that demonstrates this, it seems. Whether it be open borders to a massive invasion of our country; the accompanying huge expansion of the welfare state; the crushing high energy prices; the transference of our sovereignty to global bodies such as the World Economic Forum and World Health Organizations—every yardstick of measurement appears to indicate disaster for our nation.

But you are not thinking like Biden and the Democrats. All these indicators only point to a disaster because we are using the wrong measuring rod. Biden is not a failure. He is tremendously successful at doing what he promised to do. The Biden presidency is faithfully fulfilling what the script of the global elitists have written and what the insane world of academia has demanded for years.

At a Japanese Press conference this week the President stated it plainly. “When it comes to gas prices, we’re going through an incredible transition that is taking place that … when it’s over, we’ll be strong and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels when this is over.”

Highest prices of gasoline, shortages of food and medical supplies, shortages of baby formula, consistent downturns in the market, and the looming inevitable recession that is being forecast by Wall Street executives–these are all part of the “transition” period to force Americans onto Green Energy.

Should we be surprised? Biden promised over and again during his campaign for president that the reliance of Americans on fossil fuels was what he intended to end.

The Global Existential “Threat” of Climate Change has been the single message of the socialist bully pulpit for at least two decades. It is the single mechanism in their playbook in order to transform America into a socialistic nation, controlled by world bodies.

Americans must be forced to move away from a carbon-based, oil-producing economy in order to “save the planet” from extinction. Freedom and liberty be hanged. We all are going to be required to bow the knee to the globalist doctrine of Climate Change, suffer the consequences, and be happy. That’s an order.

You will all be Ridin’ with Biden and you will like it. But you will ride with him on electric power only, so you will need to charge up every once in a while and suffer blackouts on the electric grid. It is for your own good.

It might be suggested that Biden surely would not do this, knowing that this program of American decline is extremely unpopular. We are seeing it in his poll numbers. After all, another election is on the horizon.

Is American that slow to learn? The last election had compromised integrity and the results are still questionable, to say the least. If you doubt that, watch Dinesh D’Souza’s movie 2000 Mules. It confirms what our instincts told us. Unpopularity of a president is insignificant in a country where the integrity of elections has disappeared. We will “ride with Biden” into the ditch of societal collapse.

Our only hope is that liberty-minded, strong Constitutionalists will take the wheel and steer a better course, and soon.

Bill Lockwood: Student Loan Debt: How Socialism Distorts Sound Reasoning 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

One of many reasons to oppose the philosophy of socialism, which has its tentacles wrapped around America, is that it distorts one’s thinking. Being engulfed in it for longer periods, as Americans have been for many decades, makes it doubly-hard to rehabilitate the reasoning process. Consider Student Loan Debt, which Democratic leaders have long pressed for, and Joe Biden is now contemplating.

Outstanding Student Loan Debt in America for 2020 is approximately $1.75 Trillion, which breaks down to about $40k average amount per borrower. Statistics also show that 43% of all college attendees have taken on debt, this includes money loaned through federal and private lenders. Biden’s socialistic plan is to “cancel” this student debt, which really means, shifting the burden of loan debt onto the backs of the American taxpayers.

Reasoning Processes Short-Circuited

To see how any type of socialism, including “forgiveness” of student loan debts, actually short-circuits the reasoning process, think on this. I recently reposted a picture on Facebook that mimicked the fact that the modern generation is “drowning in student loan debt” while at the same time spending their money on “Starbucks, Useless Majors, Cable TV, New I-Phones, Tattoos, Gucci and Cocaine.

That highlighted what are the undeniable facts of a large percentage of collegiate students today while opposing the Biden plan. One person replied that that post is “kind of making assumptions.” In answer, I simply went to the heart of the matter. “It is wrong and sinful to steal from some and give to others.”

Further, many of the degrees now obtained by Generation Z are worthless from the practical standpoint of making an honest living. Assuming the Democrat plan comes to fruition, hardworking blue-collar laborers such as welders, truck drivers, and machinists, who wisely skipped the “collegiate route” for their occupations, are now being forced to pay off those huge loans for the millennials who frittered away their loans with “Anthropology” or “Ethnic and Civilization Studies” degrees.

Now comes the interesting part. My Facebook respondent retorted: “Your posts are not speaking with God’s love! … Not everyone was born with a silver spoon in their mouths. If they can’t afford to pay that loan back, tell me what should they do?”

The answer is simple, I responded. “No doubt people have burdens that they cannot carry alone. However, your solution should be, ‘I (my name), will personally assist you.’ How can you say, ‘No, I am going to empower my government to forcibly take it from my neighbor, Bill Lockwood, and that’s how it will be paid back.” I could not help but add, “And for you to lecture any of us who object to Government theft and redistribution by saying, ‘you need more love of God’—comes with poor grace.”

Just to be clear here. If any of the socialist-liberals today wish to select a college student and voluntarily help them pay off student loans. Go for it. That is God’s love. But to support an unconstitutional move that utilizes dictatorial government power to shift the burden of financial responsibility onto the backs of other people without their consent—that is not Christian.

This is the stuff of which dictators are made. Socialistic force has nothing to do with the love of God.

Apparently, this particular respondent got the point regarding force. “You’re right. No one should be forced to do for others.” But blindness remains, for big government force is still the answer to these types of liberals.

It would be good to remember here the maxim reputed to have come from George Washington: Government is not reason, it is not eloquence,–it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master.”

Bill Lockwood: Gas-Powered Vehicles & Outlawing Freedom 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

One of the greatest current ironies is that our government schools ramp-up “anti-bullying campaigns” to keep our children from intimidating or coercing others to do something to which they are opposed—all the while the government itself systemically bullies both the consumer plus the manufacturer to conform to its Green Agenda.

Make no mistake. Outlawing gas-powered vehicles, as is now being pressed by our own government, and actually planned by states such as California and Washington State, is in reality the curtailing of freedom and liberty.

“Tucked into the state’s new $17 billion transportation plan is a lofty goal: No new gas-powered cars by 2030,” writes David Kroman in The Seattle Times (4-1-22). This “represents the culmination of years of advocacy in the Legislature for what is now the most aggressive timeline in the country.”

“Matthew Metz, executive director of the environmental advocacy organization Coltura, who’s helped lead the push for more zero-emission vehicle sales, said that winning the new language creates a standard by which officials in government and the private sector must now be measured.”

In requiring these electric vehicle goals, “Washington has committed itself to following California’s vehicle emission standards, which are more stringent than the federal government’s … California is in the process of finalizing rules that would mandate that all new car sales be electric by 2035, which Washington would then follow.”

Good-Bye Liberty

In the name of the supposed Global Climate Crisis the Democrats have signed on to the Green Agenda. Democratic Governor Jay Inslee, while signing the bill this week, stated that the measure will “move us away from the transportation system our grandparents imagined and towards the transportation system our grandchildren dream of.”

Yes, the grandchildren who have been indoctrinated from grade school through the university system—they dream of a non-fossil-fuel future. But that is just the point. There never has been any real debate or discussion on the entire issue, just hard core indoctrination filtering from the socialistic United Nations down through our society.

Still others, such as Jeremy Horpedahl, an economist at the University of Arkansas, said the 2030 target is “overly ambitious.” “A better approach would be to gradually encourage consumers to switch to electric vehicles for private enterprise to build the charging infrastructure with incentives.” He told The Center Square that consumers should not be “forced to purchase electric vehicles.”

“But whatever the ideal approach is, using economic incentives to encourage” electric vehicles is “far better than a strict mandate that bans fossil-fuel automobiles.”

What of This?

First, this is good-bye to liberty and freedom for the consumer. The only difference between the above approaches is whether to force people by governmental edict or push them with government-built-in incentives. So far from the freedom formula encoded in our Constitution, which sets up an even-playing-field for all businesses, this is government-sponsored doctrine enforced by the ruling elite.

Citizens do not believe the so-called “environmental crisis” that makes this mandatory—otherwise they would be buying the electric vehicles on their own. This is why the ruling class cannot allow the free market, or freedom under God, to continue. The “environmental crisis” gives the government an excuse to curtail freedom.

As Yakima Republican Sen. Curtis King, the ranking member of the Senate Transportation Committee, stated, “They want to force everybody into an electric vehicle for whatever reason they deem fit. They want to take the choice away from the people because they think government knows more than anybody else.”

Second, this is good-bye to liberty and freedom for the producer. If the electric car was a desirable product in the free market, automobile manufacturers would already be producing them. Not only would consumers prefer them, but the economics of it would incentivize the auto industry. There would be no need for government subsidies to manufacture an electric car, nor a need for tax benefits for purchasing one.

But this is not what is occurring. Freedom for consumer and manufacturer does not terminate the gasoline-powered internal combustion engine. Therefore, government is in essence saying to the auto industry: “come up with an electric vehicle or else we will close your doors.”

So, while government schools add anti-bullying curricula to the classrooms across America, the government itself practices bullying for its own Green agenda.

 

 

Bill Lockwood: The Hard Road to World Order 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

President Joe Biden mentioned the creation of a “New World Order” in a speech to the Business Roundtable on March 21. The United States, he proclaimed, must provide leadership in establishing that order.

Columnist Larry Greenley observed that “various ‘reporters’ and ‘fact-checkers’ of the woke media have already been falling over themselves to post articles exposing the ‘New World Order’ as a ‘false conspiracy theory.’”

However, for those who have been paying attention—that is, not reliant on the Main Stream Media for information—the New World Order has been planned for decades, and Joe Biden himself wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal in 1992 entitled, “How I Learned to Love the New World Order.” In that article he asked the question, “Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter?”

The Hard Road

Why is it that our nation seems to be unraveling before our eyes and “we the people” seem powerless to stop it? The wealth of American taxpayers have been systematically siphoned off and funneled to Third World countries via international banks such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

The dollar continues to be crushed beneath the unconstitutional welfare state. Today it is worth less than 5 cents compared to its purchasing value in 1913, the year the Federal Reserve was created. Yet, Joe Biden continues to dole out the cash to welfare recipients and foreign governments. Money that we do not have.

How has it come about that Americans are being forced to shift toward Green Energy and Renewable Energies? What ever happened to the free market? And just when was America exposed to a robust debate on the causes of so-called Climate Change that supposedly drives this political shift?

Why has Biden made the United States reliant upon foreign sources for petroleum products, which betrays the necessity for going green to “Save the Planet?” Is it not more than interesting that every citizen is feeling pain at the gas pump and the grocery store and everywhere else in the market; Biden’s poll numbers continue to plummet; but there is no veering from the course of international dependence with his administration?

Why has the Biden Administration absolutely erased our southern border? With a borderless nation and MILLIONS of illegals pouring into the country—all at the expense of the American taxpayer—just how long will America remain a viable nation?

Inflation is skyrocketing with new predictions that it will reach above 10%. The wealth of individual families is dissipating before our eyes more quickly than I write these lines—but Congressional members and the American public seem powerless to remove Globalist Joe from the White House.

The answer to all of these questions is summed up in a 1974 statement by Richard Gardner in Foreign Affairs, the mouthpiece of the Council on Foreign Relations. The article is entitled “The Hard Road to World Order.”

In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.

World Economic Forum founder, Klaus Schwab, announced during the Covid-19 pandemic, that he and the global elites are pushing for a “great reset.” Schwab is simply falling in line with the global elites who have been planning this since the days of Woodrow Wilson. What we are witnessing is the “booming and buzzing” of society’s forced changes as the one-worlders push us into WORLD GOVERNMENT.

Bill Lockwood: Ostrich Logic 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

In a world in which logic and logical reasoning seem to be dissipating rapidly, university professor Gad Saad has coined a new phrase: Ostrich Parasite Syndrome. It refers to a common syndrome among all peoples, particularly the college professorships and students, whereby facts as evident as the existence of the moon are denied.

This disorder causes a person to reject realities that are otherwise as clear as the existence of gravity. Suffers from OPS do not believe their lying eyes. The construct an alternate reality known as Unicornia. In such a world, science, reason, rules of causality, evidentiary thresholds, a near-infinite among of data, data analytic procedures, inferential statistics … rules of logic, … and common sense are all rejected. Instead, the delusional ramblings of an OPS sufferer are rooted in illusory correlations, non-existent causal links, and feel-good progressive platitudes. OSTRICH LOGIC is always delivered via an air of haughty moral superiority.

Illustrative of this is Saad’s visit to a physician because he was suffering from bronchitis. “As I sat in his office, he was chain smoking. I asked him if that was a good idea while treating an asthmatic patient suffering from bronchitis. He laughed it off.”

On a more serious note, the creation of the category known as FAKE NEWS, ala Barack Obama, is now being used against the American people on a number of fronts. One item that came to my attention is that which is being now propagated by the World Economic Forum, headed by Klaus Schwab. It reads, “Klaus Schwab’s pet philosopher says, ‘Jesus rising from the dead and being the Son of God is fake news …’”

Schwab’s philosopher is Yuval Noah Harari. He is the elitist who tells us that “Humans Are Hackable Animals … Directly Connecting Brains to Computers.” Perhaps Harari’s brain has already been hacked. He certainly suffers the Ostrich Logic Syndrome.

Bill Lockwood: Big Tech: The Fourth Branch of Government? 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Noting that freedom of speech, the ability to express publicly one’s political or religious views without fear of reprisal of government entities, is one of the keystones of freedom. Thomas Jefferson weighed it even more seriously. “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

One of the most alarming Acts that was passed in early America was President John Adams’ Alien and Sedition Act which specifically outlawed “conspiracies” that opposed “any measure or measures of government” and also forbade “any false, scandalous and malicious writing against the Congress or the president.”

Jefferson rightly fought against these totalitarian measures and subsequently defeated John Adams as president. Freedom of Speech is a cornerstone of liberty itself.

Big Tech

It is with great alarm therefore, that today we witness the crushing of freedom of speech by Big Tech companies such as Google, Amazon, and Apple and the outlets such as Facebook and Twitter. Felix Salmon at Axios wrote that, “Tech giants including Facebook, Google, Amazon and Twitter have moved to quiet Trump and the far right.” “The country’s CEO’s in general, and its tech CEO’s in particular, have found themselves capable of projecting their power into the White House in way that was both successful and unprecedented.”

Big Tech is a permanent political force, observes Luis Miguel, wielding awesome power – for the left. It can almost be considered a Fourth Branch of Government.

Gad Saad, writing in his new book, The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas are Killing Common Sense, dispels a common myth—that Big Tech companies are “private” and therefore ought to be able to censor whom they like. “Social media companies are not the government,” goes the reasoning. “They have a right to choose which content will be carried on their platforms.”

Saad responds. “In a sane world, this would be a laughable position to hold, and yet it is endlessly repeated without any reflection on its nefarious implications. Google, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter have more global control over us than all other companies combined. It is not hyperbole to say that they have more collective power, in terms of the information they control, than all the rulers, priests, and politicians of history.”

“Big tech companies routinely ban right-leaning commentators, but of course this is all an unfortunate ‘algorithmic coincidence.’ What could be more sinister?”

To see the point, Saad illustrates. “Just as your electricity or phone line is not shut off if the electric company or phone company doesn’t like what you say, social media platforms should not be in the business of monitoring and punishing speech.”

To claim that these Big Tech companies are “private businesses” and should be free from government restraint also overlooks some fundamental facts. Big Tech receives “government subsidies, contracts, tax benefits, and regulations that keep smaller entrepreneurs from creating viable competitors,” observes Luis Miguel. “This can be seen today—when the establishment saw conservatives flocking to Twitter-alternative Parler, it wasn’t long before Amazon, Google and Apple colluded to shut the platform down.”

In short, the Main Stream Media and government itself—via Big Tech—is touting censorship against the American people. If free speech disappears, even under the guise of “monitoring misinformation,” liberty is lost.

Bill Lockwood: Identity Politics, Mind Pathogens, and Ketanji Brown Jackson 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

President Biden televised his phone call to Judge Ketanji Brown in which he informed her that she was nominated by him to the Supreme Court. In this short call Biden made clear the criterion by which he chose her. Diversity. As a black woman, she would help the Supreme Court to “look like much of America.”

Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) observed “Not a single justice has been a black woman. You, Judge Jackson, can be the first.”

He went on to say “It’s not easy being the first. Often, you have to be the best. In some ways, the bravest. Many are not prepared to face that kind of heat, that kind of scrutiny, that ordeal and glare of the national spotlight.” Then Durbin added, “We can be confident that the court, its role, and its decisions will be more understandable to the American public.”

Sen. Dick Blumenthal (D-Conn.) gushed, “The appointment of the first black woman to the Supreme Court—let’s be honest—should have happened years ago.” Her nomination “is a giant leap int the present for our country. Your service will make the court look more like America.”

What About This?

This is unabashed irrational identity politics. Appointing an individual to a legal position primarily because she is a black woman, regardless of her qualifications—whatever they may or may not be. She must “look like America” in order for her “decisions” to be “understandable” or acceptable to the American people.

First, this is the opposite of what Dick Durbin stated. He implies that opposition to her will be based upon the fact that she is a black woman, showing a glimpse into the race card that Democrats will use if Republicans oppose her. She doesn’t have to “be the best,” Dick—she will rely primarily upon her race for her selection. What bravery is there in that?

Second, this is a tacit admission by Democrats that Constitutional and case law will be interpreted with bias. This is what liberals prefer. Forget Lady Justice being blind-folded. This destructive mindset demands Lady Justice take off the blindfold and “interpret” law and make decisions based upon the color of one’s skin and one’s gender.

But legal interpretation is supposed to be a “rational process by which we understand” a text– “scrutinizing” the text of the Constitution. Instead, Democrats are endorsing a biased, colored view.

Author and professor Gad Saad, in his The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense, shows that this is the result of a culture that promotes “Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion” above excellence and merit. To see how this mental orientation is a “collective malady” that destroys one’s ability and capacity to think rationally—which Saad calls “idea pathogens,” consider the following example.

In April 2017, the inaugural March for Science rally was held across hundreds of cities around the world to reaffirm the “importance of science.” The key website for this event in 2017 read this way.

At the March for Science, we are committed to centralizing, highlighting, standing in solidarity with, and acting as accomplices with black, Latinx, Asian and Pacific Islander, indigenous, non-Christian, women, people with disabilities, poor, gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, trans, non-binary, agender, and intersex scientists and science advocates. We must work to make science available to everyone and encouraging individuals of all backgrounds to pursue science careers, especially in advanced degrees and positions. A diverse group of scientists produces increasingly diverse research, which broadens, strengthens, and enriches scientific inquiry, and therefore, our understanding of the world.

As Saad comments, this is “anti-science gibberish.” “By definition, science is, or should be, an apolitical process. Scientific truths and natural laws exist independent of researchers’ identities.”

Satirically, he adds, “the distribution of prime numbers does not change as a function of whether the mathematician is a white heterosexual Christian man or a transgendered, Muslim, differently sized (obese) individual.” Neither does the “periodic table of elements” depend on “whether or not the chemist is a Latinx queer or a cis-normative Hasidic Jew.”

These foolish notions promoted by the March for Science highlight that in the ecosystem of university campuses “mind pathogens” spread like wildfire. It is a pathogen because “… the manner by which scientific information is codified within the pantheon of human knowledge is not culture-specific.”

“Science does not care about the privileged position of ‘ancestral wisdom,’ ‘tribal knowledge,’ and ‘the ways of the elders.’’ There are no revealed truths in science. There is no Lebanese-Jewish way of knowing any more than there is an indigenous way of knowing.”

The same holds true of law and legal interpretation. Although one may argue that there are various theories of legal interpretation, a fair evaluation of these shows that without ‘original intent’ there might as well not be a legal text at all, in the Constitution or statutory law. Application of law is color-blind and is not culture-specific. There is not a “variety” of “equally valid forms of discovery” and interpretation.

What Democrats are confessing is that we are laying aside rational and logical thinking in favor of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Since this is the case, we might as well not have a Constitution.

Bill Lockwood: Green Doctrine of Sustainable Development Partially Responsible for Ukraine Invasion 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

The Green Doctrine of Sustainable Development, maintained by our own government, is partially responsible for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. This is not to ignore the wicked dictatorial actions of Vladimir Putin, nor to downplay the atrocities of the Ukrainian war that is now being waged by Russian forces.

However, it is worthwhile for us to consider what are some of the causes of the invasion. One of those causes is our own Green Energy Doctrine that is being maintained by the ruling oligarchs in Washington, D.C.

Evolution

For those unfamiliar with the methodology utilized by government elitists to force their own belief-systems on the rest of us, consider the General Theory of Evolution. Philip Johnson, in his blockbuster 1991 book, Darwin on Trial, demonstrated the complete lack of objective scientific evidence supporting evolution. Yet, evolution, treated as “fact,” has been crammed down the throats of Americans via the Academy for well-nigh over 100 years.

Consider the evolutionary position. Natural selection, in combination with mutation, is an innovative evolutionary process capable of producing new kinds of organisms. That’s the proposition. And what sort of evidence is marshalled to support it?

Douglas Futuyma wrote Science on Trial: The Case for Evolution, which has been widely used in collegiate classrooms. The “evidences” for the above position include: (1) Bacteria naturally develop resistance to antibiotics; (2) Male sparrows survived more frequently than smaller ones in the 1898 severe storm in Massachusetts; (3) The average size of birds, and their beaks, at Galapagos Islands went up appreciably through the drought in 1977.

Futuyma included others—but one can immediately sense that these do not begin to show the general theory of evolution. How did bacteria come to exist in the first place? Where do sparrows come from to begin with? How did birds on Galapagos Island come to exist? None of his examples begin to scientifically establish the general theory of evolution as explanatory of all forms of life. Yet, evolution is considered “fact.”

Sustainable Development

It is the same with theory of man-made Climate Change, a key component of the doctrine of Sustainable Development. The Green Agenda, the official doctrine of the United Nations as well as the elitists in Washington, D.C., is that of that Climate Change is human caused. That’s the doctrine. Hence, we must have draconian government control known as “Sustainable Development.” Government controlled everything.

Has there been any debate on Climate Change? No. Has there been any evidence brought forward which has been allowed to be cross-examined that humans cause Global Warming? Again, no. Has there been a “national conversation” on this subject—aside from 2-3 minute segments on news organs? No.

Nevertheless, climate change is declared to be an “existential crisis” that threatens human existence. Leonardo de Caprio picks up the Green Gospel and tells the UN that wildfires worsen in America because of human caused carbon emissions. Even more apocalyptic is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a sitting member of Congress, who says “The world is going to end in 12 years if we do not address climate change.” That was in 2019.

Doomsdayers such as these continue to multiply. It would not be so bad for Americans, except that many of them are lawmakers, or have the ear of lawmakers. The answer: shut-down America’s dependence upon fossil fuels—oil—and force us into a Green Energy world where everything will be solar or wind powered.

President Joe Biden, our chief executive officer, has completely bought into this. Not because he necessarily believes any of this doctrine—but this is the method to gain socialistic control of the economy. His primary political agenda involves unconstitutionally forcing America itself to leave an oil-based economy and into “Clean Energy.” Once again, no debate. No discussion.

Thus, as soon as he came into office Biden single-handedly, on day one, shut down the Keystone Pipeline. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, last January—within the first week of occupying the Oval Office, he issued an “executive order that introduced a sweeping, government-wide approach to climate policy.” His administration is “halting new oil and gas leasing on federal onshore lands and offshore waters.”

Biden also ordered the secretary of the interior to consider whether to adjust coal, oil, and gas royalties in order to account for corresponding climate costs, as well as ordering the Department of the Interior to take steps toward conserving 30 percent of public lands and waters by 2030 and toward doubling offshore wind production. These moves followed his executive orders to halt leasing the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and effectively suspended new leases. Other draconian measures followed.

War in Ukraine

What has this to do with the war in Ukraine? Only this. The complete executive blockage of our own oil production has forced America to rely on foreign imported oil—namely, from Russia. While impoverishing America, Biden has purposefully enriched Russia.

History professor and Hoover Institution fellow Victor David Hanson, pointed out the obvious connection with Putin’s War on Ukraine. Putin has become “adventuristic” whenever he has been flushed with cash due to limited oil production in the United States. Hanson cited the 2014 attack on Crimea and the 2008 invasion of Georgia as examples.

Who has flushed Putin with cash? Biden has forced America to do that.

Fox Business host Larry Kudlow recently made the same point.

Mr. Biden, you need to be honest about the damage you’re doing to the American energy industry. In fact, you’ve done everything you can to drive up prices and you know it because you’re dancing the radical green tune. Your jihad against fossil fuels has held down production in the face of rising demand and that has been a key factor in driving up world oil prices towards $100 a barrel. In effect, Biden’s jihad against fossil fuels is financing Vladimir Putin’s military adventures because if we were producing at 13 million BPD as we did pre-pandemic … oil prices would be substantially lower and Putin would be significantly poorer.

While the atrocities in Ukraine continue at the hand of Putin, remember that Biden has helped fund him.

Bill Lockwood: Tucker Carlson vs. Dick Morris 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Tucker Carlson of Fox News has come under attack for his libertarian ideals. This has particularly irked the internationalists, Republican and Democrat, who wish America to be forever entangled in foreign alliances and eternally obligated to fight foreign wars.

Dick Morris writes today in Newsmax magazine that “Tucker Carlson Went Off the Rails Backing Putin, Shame on Him.” Tucker Carlson has not appointed anyone to defend himself against the internationalist campaign to discredit him, and I would be the last one to be so appointed. However, having followed Carlson carefully for a long period of time, and subscribing to the identical worldview and foreign policy ideal as he advocates, I take in hand to answer Dick Morris.

First, Morris declares that Carlson “supports” the Russian dictator, and “would back Russia over innocent Ukraine.” This is bogus. Carlson has continually, upon a regular basis, declared a position of NEUTRALITY and NON-INTERVENTION in foreign wars. To paint this as “support” for Putin and dictatorships over “innocent” people is pretty despicable. Dick Morris: how does neutrality support one over the other? Why not state Carlson’s position exactly?

To the “internationalists” of the world, which in reality means they favor continual interventionism at the expense of the American taxpayer, the most egregious transgression is non-intervention. Morris exposes himself.

Second, Morris criticizes Carlson for supposing that Biden has been pushing for war with Russia for months. Morris pooh-poohs this as pure nonsense and points out that Biden is NOT pushing for war and it is all Putin’s fault.

In other words, according to Morris, if Putin would just back off, we would not have to go to war with him. It is all Putin’s doing.

Morris is suffering from a lack of common sense. The Democrats have been painting Russia as the number one problem in the world for months and months. Their hypocritical and manufactured criticism of Donald Trump was that he was a Russian puppet and that Putin was public enemy #1.

Third, to support his US Interventionism, Morris says that it is Russia, not China who “controls the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.” Several things here. One, if so, why has the Democratic Party been involved in supporting the nuclear program of Russia, beginning with the Obama Administration’s Uranium One deal that gave Russia an interest in a large portion of America’s uranium?

Two, Morris is playing subterfuge. The largest army in the world belongs to CHINA. This is not to downplay what is going on in Ukraine at this hour, but let us not pretend that China is only an “emerging threat.”

Fourth, and the most important point, is that Morris states that Putin’s actions constitute “an immediate threat to the United States and our allies.”

Granted that our allies in Europe are immediately under attack. But Carlson’s point, and mine also, is: What has this to do with American interests? This is not to ignore the crisis in Ukraine, but to ask—What exactly is the American interest there? Listen carefully to Morris answer this:

Ukraine is not ‘vital’ to the U.S.? I guess the Sudetenland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, and the Polish corridor weren’t either, until they were, and led to a cascade of troubles we now call WW II.

Boil this down. Logically, this means that any incursion anywhere in the world could possibly escalate into greater conflicts and even wars in which America must be involved. So, per Morris, we are bound by “moral obligation” to send our sons and daughters everywhere wrongs are committed and die for those nations. Am I the only one who sees something drastically wrong with this policy?

Even with the outbreak of World War II, America wanted to remain neutral. According to Navy Commander Robert Stinnett, who was later Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, and author of the book Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, the American people were decidedly against the United States entrance into WWII. It was the duplicitous FDR who helped provoke the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor and give us an excuse to get into the war. But Stinnett “justifies” this treasonous act of FDR because he got us “out of” a non-interventionist policy (which globalists call “Isolationism”) and helped create the new foreign policy of “internationalism.”

Unfortunately, Morris suffers from being an “internationalist” first, and an American second. The American people are tired of the warmongering of our leaders across the globe while we ourselves are under assault on our southern border, turning our inner cities into war zones. If we cannot even control our own borders or clean up our own cities, why bang the drums for war on foreign soil?

 

 

« Older Entries